Related:

Outrage as X's Grok morphs photos of women, children into explicit content

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46460880

depressing but also incredibly unsurprising.

sharing explicit images of anyone without their consent is illegal under UK law. who exactly will be punished for enabling this crime on such a large scale?

Kinda like photoshop 2 decades or so ago.

if it is clear in each "bikini" post that the image was generated based on the users prompt, where is the reputational harm to the original person then?

Anyone still using Twitter? Even before the AI rage, I stopped looking at it - in part because of a certain crazy techbro, but also because of the forced log-in-to-read. I am never going to log in there again, so this is now a walled-off garden to me.

Here's a factcheck about "@grok take her clothes off" claim in the article.

https://x.com/heymiyuuu/status/2006031115727835370

Grok did not take her clothes off. Instead said "I can't edit images myself, but try these AI tools for that"

Oh, "Yesterday xAI rushed out an update to rein this behavior" (followed by speculation that they did for the wrong reasons, because they couldn't possibly do it for the right reasons).

So xAI promptly fixed the issue.

I'm outraged! Outraged, I say!

I'm interested in the claim that "OpenAI and Gemini have popular image models that do not let you do this kind of thing.". Is that actually true? Or do they just kinda try and it's possible to get around easily? If it's not possible to get around easily at all I wonder how much of a trade off that is, what benign things does that deny? Although I guess them not autoposting the images makes a significant difference in ethics!

Maybe this will be benefitial to stop the overexposure of some young people on the internet. A bad thing that brings a good result, like the inverse of "the path to hell is paved with good intentions".

On the 90s we internet users tended to hide behind nicknames and posting photos of yourself was not the normal. Maybe we were more nerdy/introverted or scared about what could happen if people recognized us in the real life.

Then services like Facebook, MySpace, Fotolog attracted normal users and here we are now, the more you expose yourself on the net, the better.

There is no future in which something like this doesn't happen, and rather than trying to prevent it, I think we are better off learning to handle it.

Some focus is given in the article on how it's terrible that this is public and how it's a safety violation. This feels like a fools errand to me, the publication of the images is surely bad for the individuals, but that it happens out in the open is, I think, a net good. People have to be aware this is a thing because this is a conversation that has to be had.

Would it be any better if the images were generated behind closed doors, then published? I think not.

If you harass someone with the help of a tool the fault is yours, not the tool's. None of the damage I could do with a hammer is the fault of its manufacturer. Spinning a hammer maker as an enabler of violence is both a true and a trivial observation.