Mumsnetters voting Reform

[Illjustplayostrich]

Mumsnet mothers have always leaned Labour. Now Reform is ahead

https://www.thetimes.com/article/dbd39087-465c-4587-9eaa-292606ffb775?shareToken=a99daa444e8bc0f9444cca2bf01f3851

I'm slightly startled by this. I'm a centrist, slightly more right leaning perhaps but frankly I'm open to any government who will get a firm grip on the public finances and go about growing the economy in a sustainable way. My impression of this site is that it's definitely more left leaning and and Reform enthusiasts tend to get shouted down. Personally, I think we should be talking about them a lot more as it's highly likely they will form part of the next government.

My impression is that they are promising the earth but don't have people with the necessary skill set to make that happen. I really worry that they will get voted in and find out that they can't fix all the problems within 18 months, leading to yet more disillusionment amongst voters.

Let’s just clarify that: it’s ok if it’s a paid feature, so only the wealthy can sexually exploit women and kids. I mean, is this where we’re at? It’s repulsive and dangerous.

And Musk spoke out on Farage last year - he is not a fan. Farage needs Musk’s X.

Why would I want that? You’re ‘speaking absolute rubbish now’ to quote you.

Find a way to get rid of it without removing one of the few ways people communicate with the ROW. Don’t back banning X it’s next level information censorship.

But you can't see that banning X to prevent this is like banning cameras because they too have the ability to create child sex abuse. In fact cameras are to blame for a massive amount more suffering.

It is all about how the tools are used.

Maybe you should start a ban camera campaign!

Take your time to read the posts. More speed less haste as they say, then you might write better responses. He said X must go further.

That’s an absolutely weak, irrelevant analogy.

It’s not about banning cameras, it’s about saying to the camera operator or any other adult involved, you’re a paedophile, this is child sexual abuse and you’re breaking the law.

Which is exactly the point. The users who post this stuff should be held accountable. 99.9% of X users use the system legally just like 99.9% of camera users use the system legally. The tiny minority need to be locked up.

To both of @EasternStandard and @Dragonflytamer

Musk is enabling, facilitating, encouraging and profiting from people making sexualised images of children and women on his platform. He has the power to stop that and then X can continue as it is has been for those who want to use it. But he is refusing to do that. Why? And if he doesn’t stop, there has to be consequences: the safeguarding of women and kids has to take priority. And I’m done debating with you both.

I bet. If you do get what you’re after and it’s banned then I hope you at least think about the information lost. We won’t see people in Tehran in the millions. We’ll be cut off from that and other countries in the same way.

It would be very easy for the people running X to get rid of Grok. It would also be simple for them to disable the feature that undresses women/girls. Or just to disable that feature for UK users. I don't think there is a realistic way the UK government can do that. They don't have background access to the coding of every website visible in the UK (fortunately). The only realistic way they can remove it is to threaten to block the whole website if the offending feature (ability to undress women in including minors) isn't removed.

If Starmer chooses to ban X, and has the ability to do it, and indeed does it...surely he also has the ability to ban every porn site out there, that must be an even easier task.

They have had the ability to ban porn sites for years. They chose not to.

He could just has to make it illegal to post on X. It would be illegal to visit porn sites that showed the same non-consenual content.

Then issue fixed penalty notices of £250 for every post someone makes from the UK. It would be self funding and probably go some way to closing "black hole".

Maybe then he could do the same with anti-starmer posters on Mumsnet, and make posting about Reform illegal on facebook.

He could make a fortune.

Don’t give them ideas. Some will be keen on banning anything against him.

Child abuse and non-consensual adult
images/videos ARE banned and criminal - and it’s this that Musk/Grok is allowing users to generate.

Consensual adult porn is legal, although the government brought in tougher restrictions and safety measures around that last year in the Online Safety Bill. As part of that, they banned the use of deepfakes, which again is exactly what X is platforming.

Now, now, you're crediting the guy with having ideas.
One thing you know about Labour, Starmer's crew in particular, is that they have no idea how to make money, just how to spend it, and how to stop other people trying to make some.
But bans, big govt, Starmer is your man.
There's an argument to be made about this Grok images issue, but banning X is not it.

Maybe it would need to phrased as a mumsnet post tax. I'm sure he'd jump at with that framing - he loves the taxes.

Yep

I'm seeing a lot of this as friction at the boundary of the liberal and post liberal orders. We're definitely moving into new terrain that none of us are prepared for, a world of multi polar "spheres of influence", late 19th century imperial elites with 21st century weapons of mass destruction, population surveillance and atomised populations, increasingly crushed by new technology, AI, infinity "news".
A decade of the Great Awokening is morphing into the backlash from the Right.
Any middle way is not so much being crushed, just doesn't exist anymore.
Even the tragedy of the mum shot by ICE, any number of camera angles, any number of narratives, is polarizing.
As a mind experiment, I always wonder if these conversations were being had a couple of decades ago before the advent of online forums, if we were all down the pub, or at someone's house, discussing politics passionately, would there be more unanimity on things, less polarisation? Because there isn't any to be had today, as we all reside in our weaponised silos.
If we thought the last decade of the culture war was bad enough, it'll be as nothing compared to the next.

I think freedom of speech is very important. Without it we lose all sorts of other freedoms since speaking is the one thing anyone can do rich or poor, male or female

But, if you tell people that they can only have free speech if they also tolerate the online sexual abuse of children, they may well decide free speech isn't worth the price. By force teaming the important value of free speech with the right to have tools that undress children you make the strongest argument AGAINST free speech that there is. And there are governments and people wanting to erode those rights. So why give them a really good reason?

Additionally, if the price for speaking out in public is that strangers will create a deluge of AI slop porn of you, (or your wife, or your children) many people won't feel able to speak out. So in effect they then lose their freedom of speech. And this will disproportionately affect women since they are the most targeted by these tools. But men can also see their wife and children targeted. Not just by right wingers, left wing TRAs would do it to.

@1984Now Yes I agree - ever changing/fluctuating new world order, online polarisation, shift in power holders/systems, increasing conflicts to come, etc.

However, this specific issue overrides party and even national politics or culture wars: there has to be consensus, implementation of laws, steadfast boundaries, safeguarding regulations on AI/social media and sexual exploitation. And there has to be accountability on those who own and have control of the platforms, no matter how rich, well-connected, outspoken, etc. they are. We have to draw those lines, collectively, now and if not on the issue of being able to generate paedophilic images on a mainstream social media platform, then what?

Fair enough, I can't argue with your moral thrust. Good luck Starmer pulling this off without collateral damage, either to his poll ratings, or unintended consequences on free speech, transparency of news etc.
The headlines "Starmer Is UK Ayatollah" has a certain ring, don't you think?

I expect he’s going to need that luck - there’s going to be some very loud, influential voices in the backlash against this IF they can and do act on it, of course. I think it will be just as / even more damaging if they don’t do anything on this.

I do think most people want some boundaries on this: it can be weaponised against any of us, and used on any image of any child, so we’re all vulnerable.

Another day in 2026, hold on tight.

False equivalence, it would more like having a camera that can only take abusive images and allowing its sale...

Your argument is also the one the Gun lobby use....

X can control Grok and all is good, they can continue as before... Grok was used to create an image of the dead body of Renee Good, in her car, wearing a Bikini...

The Govt has asked Musk to remove this "Feature" , Musk has refused, so what do we do? a ban would very quickly lead to Musk backing down, as i believed happened in Brazil when he refused a court order.
Its up to Ofcom to ban, they are the regulator

You and others would v soon change your tune if your saw an sexualised image of your own DD or Niece.

It's really not Grok doesn't just do this - it is a wide ranging chat bot. There are plenty of other AIs that have the capability to do similar. The users need to not do it. Any digital camera could be programmed to not take sexually explicit images using exactly the same software they use to identify elsewhere. Imagine how many sexual images could be prevented if it was compulsory for that to be rolled out. How many young girls could be saved from seeing dick pics if the phone camera popped with "photo not permitted". It is already illegal to produce these images - law enforcement need to do their job. Banning an entire communication platform seems an over the top position.

As far as i'm aware, other platforms don't allow this... certainly not mainstream ones.

On law enforcement, how much more tax do you want to pay? if the police are addressing this, they are not doing other aspects of policing,
Its rather ironic you call for law enforcement when you object to the law of the land being applied to Musk/X....

Musk can be a decent human being and stop this right now, its up to him...there is no FOS argument, X is breaching UK law.... we either Police them or we do not.

Like i said, if you were affected by this, you'd soon change your tune.