4 ms·

Well, grok just automates what you can do by hand if you want, and there's not much to stop me just drawing out these same types of images manually if I want.

by themafia 10mo ago

Well, grok just automates what you can do by hand if you want, and there's not much to stop me just drawing out these same types of images manually if I want. The problem is that doing this would get me banned. Shouldn't using Grok in this way get you banned similarly?

mullingitover 10mo ago
Why? The people creating and operating the CSAM/revenge porn/depfakes creation and distribution platform are the ones who are culpable. The users who are creating text prompts are just writing words. There’s a frantic effort to claim 230 protection, but this doesn’t protect you from the consequences of posting content all by yourself on the site you own and control.
- themafia 10mo ago
  > the CSAM/revenge porn/depfakes creation and distribution platform Which, in this case, is Twitter itself, no? > The users who are creating text prompts are just writing words. With highly specific intentions. It's not as if grok is curing cancer. Perhaps it's worth throwing away this minor distinction and considering the problem holistically.
  - mullingitover 10mo ago
    > With highly specific intentions Intentions to pull the CSAM out of the server full of CSAM that twitter is running. Yes, you are making the flailing argument that the operators of the CSAM site desperately want to establish as the false but dominant narrative. If you have a database full of CSAM, and investigators write queries with specific intentions, and results show that there is CSAM in your database: you have a database full of CSAM. Now substitute 'model' for 'database.'
    - themafia 10mo ago
      Grok enables their behavior. An investigator does not _create novel child porn_ in doing a query. You're making a fallacious argument.
      - mullingitover 10mo ago
        > An investigator does not _create novel child porn_ in doing a query. And a prompt, without being aided and abetted by twitter, doesn't "create novel child porn" either. A prompt is essentially searching the space, and in the model operated by twitter it's yielding CSAM which is then being distributed to the world. If twitter were operating in good faith, even if this was the fault of its customers, it would shut the CSAM generator operation down until it could get a handle on the rampant criminal activity on its platform.
- shepherdjerred 10mo ago
  How is this not equivalent to saying that gun manufacturers should be held responsible for gun related murders?
  - ImPostingOnHN 10mo ago
    Because the gun manufacturers aren't doing anything illegal, whereas running a service which creates CSAM is, and so is distributing CSAM. The tortured equivalent analogy would be if gun manufacturers ran a service where they themselves would murder somebody with their guns whenever someone posted a tweet with the victim's name
  - immibis 10mo ago
    If you can post "Smith and Wesson, please kill this person" and then they die, someone from S&W should go to jail, yes
TheOtherHobbes 10mo ago
Automation makes it easy for everyone to do it, on demand. That's fundamentally different to "You can make this thing if you're fairly skilled and - for some kinds of images - have specialist tools." Yes, you should be banned for undressing people without consent and posting it on a busy social media site.
- themafia 10mo ago
  Why would I need to be skilled? Isn't the issue the content not the quality?
  - buellerbueller 10mo ago
    The quality is absolutely part of the issue. Imagine the difference between a nude stick figure labeled your mom, and a photorealistic, explicit deepfake of your mom. Do you find the two equally objectionable?
    - XorNot 10mo ago
      Well also in context the stick figure could still constitute sexual harassment. If a big boobed stick figure with a label saying "<coworker name>" was being posted on your social media a lot such that people could clearly interpret who you were talking about, there would be a case for harassment but also you'd probably just get fired anyway.
      - latexr 10mo ago
        Yes, but in that case everyone would understand the image is a crude depiction of someone—judging the poster—and not a real photograph—judging and embarrasing the target.
        themafia 10mo ago
        Well, if we just guarantee that we put "AI Generated" at the bottom of those images, it will be clear it's not a real photograph, and then this problem disappears?
TheOtherHobbes 10mo ago
Automation makes it easy for everyone to do it, on demand. That's fundamentally different to "You can make this thing if you're fairly skilled and - for some kinds of images - have specialist tools." Yes, you should be banned for undressing adults and kids without consent and posting it on a busy social media site.
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]

mullingitover 10mo ago

Why? The people creating and operating the CSAM/revenge porn/depfakes creation and distribution platform are the ones who are culpable. The users who are creating text prompts are just writing words. There’s a frantic effort to claim 230 protection, but this doesn’t protect you from the consequences of posting content all by yourself on the site you own and control.

themafia 10mo ago
> the CSAM/revenge porn/depfakes creation and distribution platform Which, in this case, is Twitter itself, no? > The users who are creating text prompts are just writing words. With highly specific intentions. It's not as if grok is curing cancer. Perhaps it's worth throwing away this minor distinction and considering the problem holistically.
- mullingitover 10mo ago
  > With highly specific intentions Intentions to pull the CSAM out of the server full of CSAM that twitter is running. Yes, you are making the flailing argument that the operators of the CSAM site desperately want to establish as the false but dominant narrative. If you have a database full of CSAM, and investigators write queries with specific intentions, and results show that there is CSAM in your database: you have a database full of CSAM. Now substitute 'model' for 'database.'
  - themafia 10mo ago
    Grok enables their behavior. An investigator does not _create novel child porn_ in doing a query. You're making a fallacious argument.
    - mullingitover 10mo ago
      > An investigator does not _create novel child porn_ in doing a query. And a prompt, without being aided and abetted by twitter, doesn't "create novel child porn" either. A prompt is essentially searching the space, and in the model operated by twitter it's yielding CSAM which is then being distributed to the world. If twitter were operating in good faith, even if this was the fault of its customers, it would shut the CSAM generator operation down until it could get a handle on the rampant criminal activity on its platform.
shepherdjerred 10mo ago
How is this not equivalent to saying that gun manufacturers should be held responsible for gun related murders?
- ImPostingOnHN 10mo ago
  Because the gun manufacturers aren't doing anything illegal, whereas running a service which creates CSAM is, and so is distributing CSAM. The tortured equivalent analogy would be if gun manufacturers ran a service where they themselves would murder somebody with their guns whenever someone posted a tweet with the victim's name
- immibis 10mo ago
  If you can post "Smith and Wesson, please kill this person" and then they die, someone from S&W should go to jail, yes

TheOtherHobbes 10mo ago

Automation makes it easy for everyone to do it, on demand. That's fundamentally different to "You can make this thing if you're fairly skilled and - for some kinds of images - have specialist tools." Yes, you should be banned for undressing people without consent and posting it on a busy social media site.

themafia 10mo ago
Why would I need to be skilled? Isn't the issue the content not the quality?
- buellerbueller 10mo ago
  The quality is absolutely part of the issue. Imagine the difference between a nude stick figure labeled your mom, and a photorealistic, explicit deepfake of your mom. Do you find the two equally objectionable?
  - XorNot 10mo ago
    Well also in context the stick figure could still constitute sexual harassment. If a big boobed stick figure with a label saying "<coworker name>" was being posted on your social media a lot such that people could clearly interpret who you were talking about, there would be a case for harassment but also you'd probably just get fired anyway.
    - latexr 10mo ago
      Yes, but in that case everyone would understand the image is a crude depiction of someone—judging the poster—and not a real photograph—judging and embarrasing the target.
      - themafia 10mo ago
        Well, if we just guarantee that we put "AI Generated" at the bottom of those images, it will be clear it's not a real photograph, and then this problem disappears?

TheOtherHobbes 10mo ago

Automation makes it easy for everyone to do it, on demand. That's fundamentally different to "You can make this thing if you're fairly skilled and - for some kinds of images - have specialist tools." Yes, you should be banned for undressing adults and kids without consent and posting it on a busy social media site.

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]