Ministers warn platform could be blocked after Grok AI used to create sexual images without consent

  • Ghostie@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Why is it important that people use X? Try answering that again, Elon. You fumbled the last time.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Nah, they’re not trying to ban end to end encryption because of AI deepfakes and (unofficially) for being a cesspool of barely regulated pro-fascist disinformation.

        They’re trying to ban e2ee to return to the old world (as in before the widespread adoption of the internet) order of them being able to monitor and control every second of every aspect of every citizen’s life.

        The UK government has never been very keen on privacy, except when it comes to their own financial corruption and grift.

  • dust_accelerator
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    17 hours ago

    False advertising. Free speech is not what artificially amplified fake news is.

  • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    17 hours ago

    It’s been temporarily banned in Indonesia. It could spread to other countries. Here’s hoping.

    Purposely having weak guardrails when you know it’s to protect against pornographic deepfakes and child pornography should put them in prison, not just ban the service.

      • blarghly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Preventing the spread of pornographic deepfakes is simply an extension of very reasonable existing laws banning revenge porn..

        Deepfakes in general should have significant legal regulation around them as an extension of libel/slander/defamation/disinformation laws. Imagine if you pissed the wrong person off, and they generated a bunch of deepfake videos of you cruelly killing dogs, then circulated them around to your friends, family, or potential employers. Or imagine if a politician campaigning for reform has a deepfake video generated where they argue in favor of pedophilia.

      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        No, I’m recognizing the limitations of the law and technology and accountability.

        You’re letting your beliefs to trick you into thinking they are facts and that you’re right while everyone else is wrong. It comes off as rude.

        • Limitations of the law and technology?

          No, limitations of criminal gangs that pose as government and sabotage technological development.

          There’s no actual law against arresting unjustified homicide perpetrators. Tech billionaires aren’t magically immune to classic handcuff technology.

  • mindlesscrollyparrot
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    He could disable ‘spicy’ mode at any time if he wanted to, so the free speech he is talking about is definitely CSAM and not politics.

    • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      There’s no such thing as child porn, only child sexual abuse material.

      But yes, its fucked up that nothing is done when chatbots are causes of death. That should absolutely also be a catalyst for change.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    17 hours ago

    We do want to prevent free speech.

    We also have good reason to block far right US psy ops from operating in the UK.

    Both of these things can be true.

  • stupud@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I don’t think it’s exactly because of free speech, why didn’t they ban 4chan then