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

prac@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

• phoenixz@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  It’s technically possible because AI doesn’t exist. The LLM’s we have do exist and these have no idea what it’s doing.

  It’s a database that can parse human language and put pixels together from requests. It has no such concept as child pornography, it’s just putting symbols together in a way it learned before that happen to form a child pornography picture

  source

  • prac@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    This is a lot of words to basically say the developers didn’t bother to block illegal content. It doesn’t need to ‘understand’ morality for the humans running it to be responsible for what it produces.

    source

    • Zoomboingding@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Neither of you are wrong. LLMs are wild uncaged animals. You’re asking why we didn’t make a cage, and they’re saying we don’t even know how to make one yet.

      source

      • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        Because being irresponsible is financially rewarding. There’s no downside. Just golden parachutes

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Honytawk@feddit.nl ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Yeah, how hard is it to block certain keywords from being added to the prompt?

      We’ve had lists like that since the 90’s. Hardly new technology. Even prevents prompt hacking if you’re clever about it.

      source
    • phoenixz@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Eh, no?

      It’s really REALLY hard to know what content is, and to identify actual child porn even remotely accidentally, even with AI

      source
  • IronBird@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    smh, back in my day we just cut out pictures of the faces of woman we wanted to see naked, and glued them ontop of (insert goon magazine of choice)

    source
  • Perspectivist@feddit.uk ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    AI has existed since 1956

    source

    • phoenixz@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Not AI as the common people think it is, I guess I should have cleared that up.

      AI as we currently have it is little more than a specialized database

      source
• Allero@lemmy.today ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  I feel like our relationship to it is also quite messed.

  AI doesn’t actually undress people, it just draws a naked body. It’s an artistic representation, not an X-ray. You’re not getting actual nudes in this process.

  Now, such images can be used to blackmail people, because again, our culture didn’t quite catch up with the fact that every nude image can absolutely be AI-generated fake. When it does, however, I fully expect creators of such things to be seen as odd creeps spreading their fantasies around and any nude imagery to be seen as fake by default.

  source

  • prac@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Idk, calling it ‘art’ feels like a reach. At the end of the day, it’s using someone’s real face for stuff they never agreed to. Fake or not, that’s still a massive violation of privacy.

    source
  • nullroot@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    It’s not an artistic representation, it’s worse. It’s algorithmic and to that extent it actually has a pretty good idea of what a person looks like naked based on their picture. That’s why it’s so disturbing.

    source

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Yeah they probably fed it a bunch of legitimate on/off content as well as stuff from people who used to do make nudes from celebrity photos with sheer / skimpy outfits as a creepy hobby.

      source

      • nullroot@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        Also csam in training data definitely is a thing

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • bookmeat@lemmynsfw.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Calling it an invasion of privacy is a stretch the way that copyright infringement is called theft.

      source