The biggest exploiter of women online

Musk thinks women's lives and privacy being violated is a hilarious jape - I'd love to see him get some kind of comeuppance from this, unlikely as that is.

Hasn’t Meta been caught advertising some of these awful sites on their SM. I’m sure I read something about that.

Grok is about 0.5% of the problem is my point and people only focus on it because of Musk.

it’s not the problem.

I know this message board is primarily concerned with trans issues at the moment, and be that as it may, I think we also need to recognise new dangers facing us and our girls.

This board was set up specifically for 'sex and gender' issues to be hived off to.

Grok isn't the whole problem, no but it shouldn't take a PM to call out the issue or being sued for a vaguely responsible owner to realise what their software is doing.

Just because he is more sympathetic to the GC cause than some tech bros shouldn't get him treated any more favourably on this matter than if he were a full on TRA.

A correction to my earlier post. I was right that the viral @Grok episode on X chiefly involved bikini, underwear and sexualised-pose edits, and that xAI subsequently closed the easy public route. I was too categorical in saying Grok had never generated pornography. AI Forensics documented full nudity and sexual acts through Grok.com, while the Jane Doe 4 lawsuit alleges about 7,000 explicit outputs. That allegation is not yet a court finding, but it cannot honestly be dismissed.

That still does not establish the thread title or the claims about Musk’s motives. A serious product-safety failure is not proof that Musk is “the biggest exploiter of women online”, deliberately built a porn bot or wants women abused. In the Wyoming allegation, the perpetrator was the stepfather using the tool. xAI can fairly be criticised for making image editing too easy and for inadequate initial safeguards. Musk’s personal malice and a pornography-based business plan are assumptions, not evidence.

The chronology also matters. xAI blocked the viral @Grok route in January, and X subsequently told Parliament that its nudification functionality had been disabled worldwide. xAI’s current rules expressly prohibit nudifying real people, pornographic depictions of their likenesses and sexualising children.

A later security report showed that Grok’s protections could be jailbroken, but the same jailbreak affected ChatGPT and Axios could not reproduce the Grok result in its own repeated testing. A jailbreak is a safety problem. It is not the same thing as a publicly supported feature.

Most importantly, Grok is not the whole problem. ISD found 181 dedicated nudification sites attracting more than 40 million visitors each month, alongside downloadable and locally operated models that no company can centrally disable. These decentralised tools are the harder long-term enforcement problem.

None of this minimises non-consensual sexual images. It identifies the danger accurately. Anger at Musk for unsupported reasons hands people an easy factual rebuttal and distracts from the dedicated, decentralised systems that are much harder to police.

I also think Grok deserves recognition for being unusually willing, among mainstream chatbots, to discuss biological sex and sex-based rights without automatically adopting gender-identity framing. That is my assessment, not a scientific league table. It does not excuse xAI’s early safety failure, and that safety failure does not make every accusation about Musk true.

Much more to the point - Grok does NOT allow users to do this, it never has.

The AI that absolutely makes full proper nudes of anyone or anything, is not Grok, or chatGPT or Claude, it's the low level unregulated open source stuff - it's not got anything to do with Musk.

Yes I understand now, I left twitter long before Grok was a thing. I didn't realise you could feed it content that was external to twitter - I assumed it was just able to manipulate tweets.

I use AI a lot for work: Claude Opus and Mythos/Fable, various specialised Mistral and Granite models, K3, but have never used Grok, it's not even on the radar in our industry. However I admit I don't use it at all outside of work and am not familiar with the "civilian" usage of it other than what I read in the news (or here).

Or even better, “just leave.” Oh yes, because the platforms that make money by selling PII are very quick to delete your info when you’ve left. 😂

Because if you were ever anywhere online at all, or if anyone knew you who had an image of you and it was uploaded without you knowing about it, it could still be used to generate gross images.

Are you very naive? You seem to think you can just not sign up to being exploited.

Nope. Sadly still very possible: https://www.axios.com/2026/07/14/exclusive-grok-jailbreak-creates-sexual-violent-images

I am not excusing, I want to be factually correct. I can't get upset over false information.

Grok was used to create suggestive imagery (which I believe has now been restricted), other AI was used to create porn.

Stating facts is not excusing anything.

See, I refused permission for my child's sport club to post photos of them online because unfortunately this problem has become increasingly common (there was a case where a girls football club posted a team photo and then received an email with AI generated extreme pornography of all the children (11 year old girls btw) and a demand for money not to publicly post the generated images.) But it's really bloody awful that that's something parents need to consider. In the long run if this is normalised it means womena Nansgirls won't be as free to post images of themselves publicly. I don't like the culture of constant selfies, but if images of girls playing sport, women doing public speaking for their business can't be posted without it being perceived as tacit permission for pornography to be made that's awful.

Women entering politics etc already have to accept a higher level of abuse than men and this puts some women of. I don't want all but the most thick skinned of women to be barred from public life.

Ah ok. Even more reason not to upload photos of yourself online! Although I suppose if you are a politician there will be photos of you on the commons website and in newspapers and the like.

Bikinis plus suggestive poses that echo porn shots. Also women in bikinis with ball gags in their mouths, crying etc. Musk absolutely knew what he was doing by enabling Grok to create those images. As do you by excusing it.

The veneer of civilised behaviour (of men, if you will) is thin. A further real damage is done to by eliminating or reducing past taboos, "sex work is just work" is an obvious example. Men don't use prostitutes, in part, because it s shameful, or embarrassing, or they wouldn't want their friends to know. But now technology permits people to do things they'd have never dreamed possible a few years back, like this. An 'anything goes' world is obviously bad news for women.

Also to add, which is something @Persephonia1966 is not saying, Grok was used to strip people down to bikinis, it doesn't generate porn. The AI images of people in bikinis was then fed into other AI software to produce the porn. Grok should've prevented the bikini images, but I don't think it was producing anything more explicit.

Therefore the other AI companies are actually on the hook for producing the porn. But it's much more sensationalist to say that it's all done on Musk's platform.

Huh? With your photo. Like the woman mentioned whose stepfather used a photo of her as an eleven year old to generate pornographic images of her as a child. Like the child actress (14) on Stranger Things who had multiple sexualised images made of her using Grok, like many adult women who criticised Groks ability to make AI porn who then had multiple images made of them in reaction. She is a politician there are images of her available online that can be taken. Anyone who has had photos of themselves taken, even as children, can have those photos uploaded to X and then turned to porn. And then have multiple other users share those photos and produce more.

If you aren’t on the platform how can people make fake porn of you?

Yes, but the others aren't owned by Musk. Politicians are desperate to shut Twitter down because under Musk he has allowed people outside the Establishment Left to have a voice again on the platform.

Before Musk, saying that trans women were men was a ban-able offence.

I believe that they've censored the AI heavily since then, but this really isn't about that.

@Persephonia1966 oh i see how foul

I can look at fancy dresses on a website. Save those and then separately look up shoes that I think might go with them for a wedding etc. However many clothing websites are smart, and want to encourage me to buy as much as possible. Therefore if I start looking at dresses a "for you" type thing will appear that recommend shoes. This is helpful to me and also makes me more likely to buy shoes which the clothes website wants. It tells you something about the business plan of clothing sites and their users preferences.

Musk knows the people using X might want to creat pornographic images of women and children. That is why he added a tool to Grok that lets people do it at minimum effort AND post this direct to X. This ensures that people use his AI more and boosts usage figures, it also means people are more likely to stay on his site because they are getting services they want. In theory they could go to the effort of doing it themselves, some of them might anyway. But he is making it as easy as possible because he wants to encourage that behaviour because it benefits his site. That this is the case reflects really horribly on X users as a group and on Elon Musk. Because it is so easy it means much more is created than would be otherwise and it is shared in a way that is most damaging to the victims. (It also suggests he hasn't got any other way of monetising his wretched AI except as a porn bot which is odd given AI was meant to be world changing).

This is a very good point. Surprised there are people on this board who don’t mind pork being made of them as long as it’s not sent to them!

Doesn't all AI do this or it can be used to do it I might've got that wrong

Yes, but they aren't circulating fake porn of you to their customers. If they were that would be a problem for you regardless of whether you were a customer or not.