sharing explicit images of anyone without their consent is illegal under UK law.
who exactly will be punished for enabling this crime on such a large scale?
Anyone still using Twitter? Even before the AI rage, I stopped looking at it - in part because of a certain crazy techbro, but also because of the forced log-in-to-read. I am never going to log in there again, so this is now a walled-off garden to me.
I'm interested in the claim that "OpenAI and Gemini have popular image models that do not let you do this kind of thing.". Is that actually true? Or do they just kinda try and it's possible to get around easily? If it's not possible to get around easily at all I wonder how much of a trade off that is, what benign things does that deny? Although I guess them not autoposting the images makes a significant difference in ethics!
Maybe this will be benefitial to stop the overexposure of some young people on the internet. A bad thing that brings a good result, like the inverse of "the path to hell is paved with good intentions".
On the 90s we internet users tended to hide behind nicknames and posting photos of yourself was not the normal. Maybe we were more nerdy/introverted or scared about what could happen if people recognized us in the real life.
Then services like Facebook, MySpace, Fotolog attracted normal users and here we are now, the more you expose yourself on the net, the better.
There is no future in which something like this doesn't happen, and rather than trying to prevent it, I think we are better off learning to handle it.
Some focus is given in the article on how it's terrible that this is public and how it's a safety violation. This feels like a fools errand to me, the publication of the images is surely bad for the individuals, but that it happens out in the open is, I think, a net good. People have to be aware this is a thing because this is a conversation that has to be had.
Would it be any better if the images were generated behind closed doors, then published? I think not.
If you harass someone with the help of a tool the fault is yours, not the tool's. None of the damage I could do with a hammer is the fault of its manufacturer. Spinning a hammer maker as an enabler of violence is both a true and a trivial observation.
This is damage-as-a-service, free of charge and as anonymous as your account, plus automatic distribution of the results to the victim and for all to see.
Great. So we can subpoena twitter for the information about everybody who used Grok to create this monstrous content so they can be rounded up?
I'm personally fucking sick of sexual abuse being treated just like something that every woman in society just needs to deal with. "Oh, we put the revenge porn machine right in front of everybody and made a big red button for you to push" is horrible. But at least we should be screaming from the rooftops about every hideous person using this machine. Every single one of their friends should leave them.
Rubbish. That analogy is like comparing a gun manufacturer to a hitman service.
Elon Musk is willingly allowing Grok to be used to harass women (and children). He could easily put in safeguards to prevent that, but instead he chooses to promote it as if its a good thing.
Practically no one defends websites that host AIs to remove clothing from photos of women, or put them in bikinis. The few people who do defend them are usually creeps who need their hard drive searched. Same goes for anyone defending this
18 comments
[ 5.5 ms ] story [ 48.0 ms ] threadOutrage as X's Grok morphs photos of women, children into explicit content
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46460880
sharing explicit images of anyone without their consent is illegal under UK law. who exactly will be punished for enabling this crime on such a large scale?
On the 90s we internet users tended to hide behind nicknames and posting photos of yourself was not the normal. Maybe we were more nerdy/introverted or scared about what could happen if people recognized us in the real life.
Then services like Facebook, MySpace, Fotolog attracted normal users and here we are now, the more you expose yourself on the net, the better.
Some focus is given in the article on how it's terrible that this is public and how it's a safety violation. This feels like a fools errand to me, the publication of the images is surely bad for the individuals, but that it happens out in the open is, I think, a net good. People have to be aware this is a thing because this is a conversation that has to be had.
Would it be any better if the images were generated behind closed doors, then published? I think not.
I'm personally fucking sick of sexual abuse being treated just like something that every woman in society just needs to deal with. "Oh, we put the revenge porn machine right in front of everybody and made a big red button for you to push" is horrible. But at least we should be screaming from the rooftops about every hideous person using this machine. Every single one of their friends should leave them.
Elon Musk is willingly allowing Grok to be used to harass women (and children). He could easily put in safeguards to prevent that, but instead he chooses to promote it as if its a good thing.
Practically no one defends websites that host AIs to remove clothing from photos of women, or put them in bikinis. The few people who do defend them are usually creeps who need their hard drive searched. Same goes for anyone defending this