zlacker

>>vikave+(OP)
Good one.

No platform ever should allow CSAM content.

And the fact that they didn’t even care and haven’t want to spend money for implementing guardrails or moderation is deeply concerning.

This has imho nothing to do with model censorship, but everything with allowing that kind of content on a platform

>>mnewme+pE3
It seems people have a rather short memory when it comes to twitter. When it was still run by Jack Dorsey, CP was abundant on twitter and there was little effort to tamp down on it. After Musk bought the platform, he and Dorsey had a public argument in which Dorsey denied the scale of the problem or that old twitter was aware of it and had shown indifference. But Musk actually did take tangible steps to clean it up and many accounts were banned. It's curious that there wasn't nearly the same level of outrage from the morally righteous HN crowd towards Mr. Dorsey back then as there is in this thread.

>>tw85+Ux4
Having an issue with users uploading CSAM (a problem for every platform) is very different from giving them a tool to quickly and easily generate CSAM, with apparently little-to-no effort to prevent this from happening.

>>jmcgou+g45
If the tool generates it automatically or spuriously, then yes. But if it is the users asking it to, then I'm not sure there is a big difference.

>>timmg+r55
Well, its worth noting that with the nonconsensual porn, child and otherwise, it was generating X would often rapidly punish the user that posted the prompt, but leave the grok-generated content up. It wasn't an issue of not having control, it was an issue of how the control was used.