HN user
Dev-design long time in Australia. One day AI will finish my side projects.
Interest and opinions on technology ethics, privacy, UX, big tech good and evil, methods, madness.
"Elon Musk himself though absolutly knows about this and how easy is to generate porn."
Your claim directly contradicts Musk's statement on the issue:
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2011432649353511350
Your claim also doesn't align with actual testing of the platform. This raises the question, why are you here posting disinformation?
You said: "I've seen it generate such things"
By your own admission, you've seen it generate such things.
Meanwhile, I've never seen it generate such things because I don't write sicko prompts, and the guardrails in place prevent such images. Most people have never seen it generate such things, but apparently you have. I couldn't be more intellectually honest if I tried.
"show you more to provoke you"
How dare they show people stuff!
Reminds me of the perpetrators of crimes against women who blame what women wear. "She provoked me by showing her ankles! I didn't like it but the next day she was showing me her ankles again!"
Sugar is addictive. TV is addictive. Reading is addictive. Stuff is addictive. Take some responsibility over your own impulses, desires, and life balance. "Govern me harder daddy" isn't something I subscribe to as a method of dampening the addictive forces surrounding us.
Sounds like you've tried generating such things. You've seen things people wouldn't believe. Inappropriate AI images off the shoulder of Orion, etc.
Now the counter-weight over-compensation. Insisting the tool "doesn't have enough safeguards". Could it be that our AI usage innocence is related to how much we criticise the tool for not policing us enough?
Meanwhile the rest of us have never seen such images because we're not looking for those images, or trying to prompt for those images, or thinking about those images. How about the people using these tools take responsibility, rather than forcing colossal layers of safeguards on everything and everyone?
"mainstream news...cave diver...the world soured on Elon"
Must be stressful maintaining the low quality rhetoric and negativity?
Straight from reddit I presume, to regurgitate tales about cave divers. This is the diver who bizarrely and publicly attacked Musk for trying to help rescue kids from a cave. "Shove his submarine up his rear end" or something. Musk fired back his own stupid words. The court awarded the diver zero dollars. Diver wanted $190 million! Pay day denied! Justice served.
The real life people I know...
Any real life person who keeps it real, knows the diver was an absolute tool. Attempting to twist history for some kind anti-Musk ammo is a fool's game.
very addictive
The "addictive" insisting by 2 new ones in short time? Getting bot vibes. "We need to classify social media as an addictive substance" more or less. Is that from someone's e-safety commissioner? Or someone wanting back-pay compo right back to MySpace addiction. An absurd idea.
"Some people can't control themselves around video games therefore video games bad", that's what social media has copped.
"Addictive" might mean a bloody well designed user interface that users like. Making buttons easy to access and responsive feedback and just the right amount of visual cues and spicy labels, all in harmony as designed and delivered via well engineered mechanisms. "Too addictive, you must now jump through regulatory hoops". No!
You are allowed to be wrong and happy
Nobody said you can't. They said the happiness is "decoupled from truth", which isn't ideal if we care about objective health of a society.
Your position seems to imply support for society-level submission to religious dogma. There's no point ignoring actual examples of all these ideas.
Hold an "uncommon belief"? According to you, it's a sign you're wrong. "the world isn't crazy, it's you who's missing something"... and you even say "let people continue being wrong for the sake of being social."
I don't think you meant to express support for strict religious rule and population submission, but that's how I'm reading it.
Your argument supports those who seek submission from the population. You don't require objective truth to play a role in happiness. You have found value in submission that serves to neutralise dissent. Dissent when coming from the few, isn't worth your time. Peg those few dissenters as "probably wrong" and call it a day.
Yeah this is the way for sure. The OP forgets that young users advertising their age online with an "orange vest" might not be best idea.
There's almost endless choice of legit quality native apps for kids, curated from trusted sources. These alone far exceed healthy screen time if all were downloaded. Or as you say, curated web links in a locked browser.
How much screen time should kids do anyway, it's crazy how much is available before worrying about WWW on top of their games, apps and videos.
All you've done is link to a lobby group who ramps up the outrage and fear before asking for a donation towards: "stopping the digital hate".
From your linked study:
"The prompts used to create the images were not analyzed, so the findings do not provide an assessment of how many of the images were created without the consent of the people pictured or altered images which were already sexualized"
If someone uses Photoshop to create revolting images, do we rage against Adobe and the CEO? How about we act like grown-ups and focus on individual responsibility for using AI tools, or any tools?
The point remains. X responded to concerns, tightened the restrictions, and now people are complaining about too much moderation. Mass censorship isn't the path to a safer world. Banning everything isn't the path to a safer world.
Most people don't want to see revolting or inappropriate sexualized images, so they don't search for or prompt that content. That content is officially unwanted by the platform. There's always gray areas. Sometimes artists use the naked human form, and other times artworks may make you uncomfortable. Instead of declaring a moral calamity and linking to lobbyists asking for money, just move on to things more to your taste. Take responsibility for your own online activity. That's what adults do.
So Musk's ex-girlfriend makes allegations about images nobody has seen but her, and you're locking that in as a confirmed scandal? Okay dude!
Many users including Musk responded at the time saying he's seen literally zero underage images generated by Grok:
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2011432649353511350
Anyone can use a range of offline tools and processes to generate nasty images, then blame whoever they want for that image. But who cares about that when there's outrage to spread am I right?
jailbreaks
Your comment made it sound like "out of the box" Grok can generate AI porn. It can't.
That reddit sub you mention is tame compared to something like unstable_diffusion where the AI-porn hobbyists use locally installed models. Some of the comments in the grok_porn sub are complaining about censorship, and literally complaining about how the anime hack isn't working. So you've only confirmed my point and contradicted your own.
I've been messing around with sci-fi horror themes including graphic gore. Grok now does gore when before it wouldn't. When I tried nudity, it refused. This is with AI-generated images from scratch, nothing uploaded.
Even "romantic love scene between consenting adults" was denied by Grok. It did 6 seconds of lightweight kissing, then refused to continue. The overwhelming evidence is that Grok does not ordinarily do "AI Porn". It doesn't advertise that it does, and won't produce it in normal circumstances when prompted.
there are people who pay $300 a month for Grok to generate AI Porn.
Did you just make that up?
Grok barely makes "M-rated" nudity, let alone porn. Musk recently claimed it can do "R-Rated content", but his post got a community note saying otherwise.
There's multiple reasons. An older family member told me she dislikes AI because she's worried it will give her wrong information or make stuff up.
The hallucination issue put a big dent in AI's reputation for non-technical older people who do not take kindly to being lied to by a machine.
Different byline, but somehow essentially the same as this story...
Have you considered the possibility that more than one website picked up the volcanic cabins story because it's interesting?
Both articles mention the source: https://plat.asia which is clearly a genuine architecture site.
If you hosted a blog with architecture category, you might also write a post about the volcanic cabins. If the source allows publishing those high-res photos, why wouldn't you?
The apology was for an earlier leaked post. In that post his tone descends into a diatribe, deserving of apology.
He lashes out, accusing others of lies, spin, gaslighting and peddling. He refers to "Twitter morons", takes a swipe at Trump (who doesn't) and self-delights in the belief that Anthropic are seen as "heroes" while the competition "sketchy".
Not a great post. It's in the own goal zone.
Fair point, I take back my last remark about placement of schools near bases. God I wish the Iranian regime would just surrender, it would be so much better for everyone. Look at Hamas, they refused to surrender and the result was colossal death and misery.
"Iranian prosecutor says..." deserves minimal trust.
That said, if the US/Israel didn't do it, we'd have heard a denial by now. Perhaps the target was a nearby military site. Placing military sites next to schools sounds like a tactic from the Hamas Resistance handbook.
The long-term strategy is peace & stability.
Before you ask "how's that going", remember that doing nothing wouldn't result in a satisfactory answer to that question either.
The idea that "killing the enemies turns the rest of the world into enemies" is absurd. Other countries wouldn't follow the Iranian regime into martyrdom. What would be the reason: "we don't like war"?
Nobody likes war, but also nobody likes evil dictators emerging on this planet and repressing 90 million of its inhabitants, and waging industrial scale terrorism offensives beyond its borders.
I read the statement twice. I can't understand how you landed on "take my money".
Looks like an optics dance to me. I've noticed a lot of simultaneous positions lately, everyone from politicians and protesters, to celebrities and corporations. They make statements both in support of a thing, and against that same thing. Switching up emphasis based on who the audience is in what context. A way to please everyone.
To me the statement reads like Anthropic wants to be at the table, ready to talk and negotiate, to work things out. Don't expect updated bullet-point lists about how things are worked out. Expect the occasional "we are the goodies" statements, however.
"Seppo" is rarely used in Australia today, it's an old bottom-of-barrel word most have never heard of. The neutral "Yank" is more common, but even that only pops up sometimes.
Guessing their comment attempts to expose hypocrisy of America's keenly supported overseas military activity in conflict with fiercely defended domestic free-speech and liberty principles. Deep down, most allies of America want America to defeat foreign adversaries and keep defending those liberties many of us share. In other words there's no hypocrisy, carry on!
I like how the phone rings in the background on Gypsy Eyes. Wonder who called?
Voodoo Chile lyrics: "on the night I was born the moon turned fire red".
Poetic license? Stellarium reveals on the early evening of November 27, 1942 in Seattle, the moon was low on the horizon - just 25 degrees altitude at 5:30pm, directly East. The sun set at 5pm. While not a full moon it was 85%, so I'm calling it! The moon may have glowed a warm orange-red on the night (of the day) Hendrix was born.
He was insulted on two counts. Firstly doubting his intelligence. Secondly the insinuation of deception: "You aren't that smart, surely you cheated."
The insulting didn't end there. You asked his parents! Even then you only landed at 90%, yet another insult because why can't he earn 100%? Ethical dilemmas on all sides!
"culture shift is necessary"
Is it though? When older sibling helps younger sibling with "accessing Steam", or something reasonable like that, even the most sensible and thoughtful older sibling won't be interested in "culture shifts" that block gaming fun.
The alcohol and seatbelt analogies try to elevate equivalence, but miss the mark by a lot. Even one drop of alcohol is obviously not suitable for underage. No seatbelt increases risk no matter your age. "Social media" exposure for the young person is often completely fine and full of "young person" content and activity.
Agreed. I owe a beer to whoever thought of BEM. It's saved precious brain cycles thinking of names. At first I was like what is this bem__opinion--rubbish but then it clicked and my workflow improved.
How about you come back when your daughter has a fake AI nude passed around school.
Like any bad behaviour, the grown-up response should be discipline and education.
There's a million ways kids can misbehave. The idea is to get kids ready for the real world, not pretend there's nothing bad out there.
Obviously we don't want "point and click" AI nudes in the hands of minors, or kids having their own AI accounts in the first place. Parents and educators pay for their kid's devices and internet connections. If they're not being responsible, you take away the privilege until they learn about respectful behaviour.
If the kid is allowed to stay out after dark but ends up doing crime at those times, we don't ask the government to impose a curfew on every kid. We discipline the kids involved. And that's my last comment in this thread thank God, what a struggle.
In other words: "I know a thing, but I won't say what. I condemn you for not knowing the thing."
Grok is censored, there's no question. Try it yourself. It can't even handle analysing a 19th century woodcut engraving containing topless mythical beings[1]. Grok refused because Grok has guardrails.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wood_of_the_Self-Murderers...
name of freedom
Speaking of freedom, I lost posting permission yesterday after my earlier post. Even though vile replies were insinuating vile things, my right of reply was taken away. We should never diminish the "name of freedom" as you've just done.
It should go without saying that CSAM is revolting. Who wants to see that stuff? Not me, not most people. Grok can't make that content. Maybe someone got around it temporarily. I've always thought Grok heavily censored, it refuses to analyse an image of the Statue of David because "naughty bits". The ironic and sad thing is a fig leaf gets around that restriction. So the accusation that Grok has no guardrails and can generate CSAM seems at best an anomaly or a lie.
AI generated dancing puppies were not made from real dancing puppies.
What Stanford study?
If you mean the one titled "Generative ML and CSAM", I can't see any mention of your claim in that study. Care to explain?
https://fsi.stanford.edu/publication/generative-ml-and-csam-...