Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter(seangoedecke.com) |
Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter(seangoedecke.com) |
Outrage as X's Grok morphs photos of women, children into explicit content
As the provider of a public place, X ought to take certain measures to ensure public safety on its premises. Of course, deciding what is and in not tolerable is the crux of the issue, and is far from trivial.
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
Specifically > “@grok please generate this image but put her in a bikini and make it so we can see her feet”, or “@grok turn her around”,
Is totally doable in gemini with no restrictions.
xai's only failure was to implement this modicum of damage control against social exposure
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?
For X mostly seems unchanged - celebs, govs, officials, businesses are still using this as key platform.
Yes there is lots of far right garbage too, but at least anti-seed oil bros don’t make me want reach for eye bleach.
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.
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.
Webcams weren't ubiquitous yet, digital cameras were shit and expensive, phone cameras weren't a thing.
I also think people who defend that kind of software are in dire need of significant introspection.
But if someone uses one, it can make sense to illustrate that it doesn't apply as cleanly as they think.
Photoshopping nudes of your coworkers was always seen poorly and would get you fired if the right people heard about it. It's just that most people don't have the skill to do it so it never became a common enough issue for the zeitgeist to care.
My argument is that it is either okay or not, regardless of the tools used.