"“We take action against illegal content on X, including Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM), by removing it, permanently suspending accounts, and working with local governments and law enforcement as necessary,” X Safety said. “Anyone using or prompting Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.”
How about not enabling generating such content, at all?
I'm not much on X anymore due to the vitriol, and visiting now kinda proved it. Beneath almost every trending post made by a female is someone using grok to sexualize a picture of them.
(And whatever my timeline has become now is why I don't visit more often, wtf, used to only be cycling related)
Any lawyers around? I would assume (IANAL) that Section 230 does not apply to content created by an agent owned by the platform, as opposed to user-uploaded content. Also it seems like their failure to create safeguards opens up the possibility of liability.
And of course all of this is narrowly focused on CSAM (not that it should be minimized) and not on the fact that every person on X, the everything app, has been opened up to the possibility of non-consensual sexual material being generated of them by Grok.
I can see this becoming a culture war thing like vaccines. Conservatives will become pro-CSAM because it triggers the overly sensitive crybaby Liberals.
> That’s like blaming a pen for writing something bad,” DogeDesigner opined.
Genuinely terrifying how Elon has a cadre of unpaid yes-men ready to justify his every action. DogeDesigner regularly sub tweets Elon agreeing to his latest dumb take of the day, and even seems to have based his entire identity on Elon's doge obsession.
I can't imagine how terrible that self imposed delusion feels deep down for either of them.
Jokes on xAI. Europe doesn't have a Section 230 and the responsibility fall squarely on the platform and its owners. In Europe, AI generated or photoshopped CSAM is treated the same as actual abuse-backed CSAM if the depiction is realistic. Possession and distribution are both serious crimes.
The person(s) ultimately in charge of removing (or preventing the implementation of) Grok guardrails might find themselves being criminally indicted in multiple European countries once investigations have concluded.
At this point it should be clear that they know that Grok is unsafe to use, and will generate potentially illegal content even without a clear prompt asking it to do so.
This is a dangerous product, the manufacturer _knows_ it is dangerous, and yet still they provide the service for use.
Elon Musk attends the Donald Trump school of responsibility. Take no blame. Admit no fault. Blame everyone else. Unless it was a good thing, then take all credit and give none away.
I don't buy the "I only provide the tool" cop out. Musk does control what Grok spews out and just chooses not to act in this case.
When Grok stated that Israel was committing genocide, it was temporarily suspended and fixed[0]. If you censor some things but not others, enabling the others becomes your choice. There is no eating the cookie and having it too - you either take a "common carrier" stance or censor, but also take responsibility for what you don't censor.
65 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 62.6 ms ] thread"“We take action against illegal content on X, including Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM), by removing it, permanently suspending accounts, and working with local governments and law enforcement as necessary,” X Safety said. “Anyone using or prompting Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.”
How about not enabling generating such content, at all?
(And whatever my timeline has become now is why I don't visit more often, wtf, used to only be cycling related)
Edit: just to bring receipts, 3 instances in a few scrolls: https://x.com/i/status/2007949859362672673 https://x.com/i/status/2007945902799941994 https://x.com/i/status/2008134466926150003
I assume the courts will uphold this anyway because Musk rich and cannot be held accountable for his actions.
So from technical wonder to just like a pen in one easy step. Wouldn’t it be great if you could tell the AI what not to output?
And of course all of this is narrowly focused on CSAM (not that it should be minimized) and not on the fact that every person on X, the everything app, has been opened up to the possibility of non-consensual sexual material being generated of them by Grok.
Genuinely terrifying how Elon has a cadre of unpaid yes-men ready to justify his every action. DogeDesigner regularly sub tweets Elon agreeing to his latest dumb take of the day, and even seems to have based his entire identity on Elon's doge obsession.
I can't imagine how terrible that self imposed delusion feels deep down for either of them.
The person(s) ultimately in charge of removing (or preventing the implementation of) Grok guardrails might find themselves being criminally indicted in multiple European countries once investigations have concluded.
Grok is just another tool, and IMO it shouldn't have guard rails. The user is responsible for their prompts and what they create with it.
This is a dangerous product, the manufacturer _knows_ it is dangerous, and yet still they provide the service for use.
When Grok stated that Israel was committing genocide, it was temporarily suspended and fixed[0]. If you censor some things but not others, enabling the others becomes your choice. There is no eating the cookie and having it too - you either take a "common carrier" stance or censor, but also take responsibility for what you don't censor.
[0] https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250813-chatbot-grok-...