zlacker

>>vikave+(OP)
I’m sure Musk is going to say this is about free speech in an attempt to gin up his supporters. It isn’t. It’s about generating and distributing non consensual sexual imagery, including of minors. And, when notified, doing nothing about it. If anything it should be an embarrassment that France are the only ones doing this.

(it’ll be interesting to see if this discussion is allowed on HN. Almost every other discussion on this topic has been flagged…)

>>afavou+kh
> when notified, doing nothing about it

When notified, he immediately:

  * "implemented technological measures to prevent the Grok account from allowing the editing of images of real people in revealing clothing" - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8gz8g2qnlo 

  * locked image generation down to paid accounts only (i.e. those individuals that can be identified via their payment details).

Have the other AI companies followed suit? They were also allowing users to undress real people, but it seems the media is ignoring that and focussing their ire only on Musk's companies...

>>cbeach+Vh
You and I must have different definitions of the word “immediately”. The article you posted is from January 15th. Here is a story from January 2nd:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c98p1r4e6m8o

> Have the other AI companies followed suit? They were also allowing users to undress real people

No they weren’t? There were numerous examples of people feeding the same prompts to different AIs and having their requests refused. Not to mention, X was also publicly distributing that material, something other AI companies were not doing. Which is an entirely different legal liability.

>>afavou+kj
The part of X’s reaction to their own publishing I’m most looking forward to seeing in slow-motion in the courts and press was their attempt at agency laundering by having their LLM generate an apology in first-person.

“Sorry I broke the law. Oops for reals tho.”