Comment on Grok AI still being used to digitally undress women and children despite suspension pledge

Deceptichum@quokk.au ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

• HeyJoe@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  If they are being stored on his servers then he absolutely should be, and whoever else is in charge of that company. If that was found on any regular persons pc it would be over, so why not here.

  source

  • shalafi@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Section 230 of the Communications Act provides immunity for online platforms and users, stating they generally aren’t liable for content posted by others, allowing them to host third-party information without being treated as the “publisher or speaker”.

    source

    • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      This would be a valid argument if X itself weren’t the ones generating the images.

      source

      • shalafi@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        Oh! I hadn’t thought that through. Guess we don’t have laws to cover hold AI responsible and the company can simply dodge responsibility.

        source
    • DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      But it’s their own servers that generates de image. And how it was trained to be able to generate it in the first place?

      source
    • HeyJoe@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Thanks! That makes sense. Although it’s not really others if you ask me, its themselves. I’m sure they would argue otherwise. No accountability and it’s only getting worse.

      source
  • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    The story says:

    After days of concern over use of the chatbot to alter photographs to create sexualised pictures of real women and children stripped to their underwear without their consent

    Pictures of women or children in underwear are generally not illegal in the United States.

    source