If you're still on X are you ok with what Grok's been doing?

[user4532789]

Young girls, un-consenting women and now this

‪@eliothiggins.bsky.social‬
Just seen Grok putting the body of the victim of the ICE shooting in Minneapolis into a bikini. Digital corpse desecration now available to the public.
13:30 · 8 Jan 2026

Yup.

And there's a difference between bad actors using a "neutral" tool as a means of radicalization, vs having an entire platform that is geared for that purpose - especially when the owners are foreign nationals trying to interfere in our politics.

This!

Ban Google and Gemini too. In fact let's ban the Internet.

Are you still on Facebook? Were you okay with how they enabled Cambridge Analytica and the psychological targeting used to promote certain political viewpoints? Do you buy from Shein or Amazon or eat meat? Yada yada yada

Yep. The internet has all kinds of stuff on it. The pp knows that so can stop using it.

Imagine shilling this hard for an actual Nazi

Can you answer if you’d prefer we had no access to coverage from Iran?

Much of it is on X

.

Plsnty of coverage of Iran on other platforms.

The whatabouttery in here is alarming.

All sorts of technologies and platforms have been used to do bad things - and responsible developers/owners make serious efforts to address them.

Grok is being singled out not because it's the only AI image generator that has ever been used to make pornographic deep fakes, but because it's the one with the most obvious and pervasive failures in safeguards, that seems to be making the limpest efforts to address the issue.

I cant believe that people are willing to retreat to partisan battlelines, and make such trite and bad faith arguments, over the creation of (among other things) CSAM.

Take a look at yourselves for heaven's sake.

Old Twitter had teams of people deleting and banning people for expressing perfectly legal and mainstream political viewpoints. Many British feminists were targeted.

It would shadow-ban people for sharing sober and well-informed speculation that Covid may have escaped from a lab. Which is now a sayable opinion again in US Democratic circles, but was treated as the Vatican treated heliocentism.

And iirc the company itself actively promoted the BLM anti-policing movement, which left thousands of excess dead people in its wake because of subsequent spikes in murder rates. (I don’t recall precisely if Twitter corporately did, but it’s undeniable that the platform content heavily promoted that).

Did you want Twitter banned then?

If not then it’s not political interference you object to, provided the weapon is in your team’s hands.

I feel similarly with posters so keen to ban X as the outcome. It’s partisan as X is not left enough. And many are fine to be excluded from major information such as Iran uprising. Very concerning.

Speech censorship is always fraught, but old Twitter was not censoring speech in order to advance it's own agenda. It's censorship - which is always going to be far from perfect at such a scale - was driven by attempting to comply with laws (re. hate speech), or in response to government/regulatory pressue and demands.

X's algorithms/censoring is specifically designed to advance a particular agenda.

If you think that the USA actually did ban TikTok you need to get out more

This is as unconvincing as the ‘George Soros is a literal Marxist’ stuff from the other side. Utterly ignorant of Marxist (or Soros) and smug in their ignorance.

I have had this User Name since before Twitter and Facebook and Linkedin and Instagram and Mumsnet and Reddit even existed.

(I started on the Ebay boards)

Sexual bullying pre existed all of the sites people are frothing about
because the issue is people, not software

For those with short memories, this video is 20 years old

The USA did ban TikTok, after carefully weighing free speech vs national security. The ban had massive bipartisan support and was approved by the highest court.

The ban was then promptly overturned by Donald Trump, through an executive order. Probably because his then best-bud, Elon, asked him to (fearing it as a precedent-setter).

It never took effect

And if it had, something else would have replaced it.

The genie is out of the bottle

I don’t buy it I’m afraid.

The banning of misgendering was not because it was illegal in either California or the UK. Nor does US law prohibit speculation on lab leak theory (though I think you are right there was govt pressure. Pressure that Twitter seems to have happily acceded to). Nor is opposing defunding the police a hateful position.

These were political positions actively promoted by Twitter to advance a political agenda.

I think Musk is a complex and often harmful character. But I think Twitter corporately is now much freer and less ideologically motivated.

There are plenty of unpleasant people and views on there, but they are easy to ignore, and the place itself is not trying to suppress specific viewpoints.

Yes, it did take effect.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz6p1g54q85o

Which platform do you prefer to use?

But back to theme, Musk wont modify, so then what? just let the abuse of children and women carry on?

That's pretty much what they're saying.🤷‍♀️

Fortunately the rest of the world have copped on. Its been banned in Malaysia and Indonesia. Poland, France, Australia, EU, India, Brazil and the UK have started action. Other countries, including the US are investigating.

Calls to ban Musk's pornification programme have come from across the world and across the political spectrum. Rightly so.

You haven’t said how you’ve directly asked men to change their behaviour. Can you say?

Just women on mn for some reason.

Twitter's old policy prohibited targeted misgendering, which has fallen afoul of hate speech and harassment laws in a number of jurisdictions. It wasn't that "misgendering" was criminalized in and of itself, but that it often formed a part of conduct that was criminalized in various jurisdictions.

But it's also one part a commercial decision - codes of conduct are generally used to improve the user experience in a way that maximizes user intention.

You might be aware that, although it briefly scrapped it, X reinstated the policy back in 2024. I think we can safely say that it does not reflect an agenda that Musk wants to advance, but the reintroduction was driven by other concerns.

I don't know why you think Twitter happily bowed to pressure to suppress "covid misinformation". Social media companies (Twitter included) initially took an entirely laid back approach to misinformation, before ultimately bowing to intense (bipartisan) political, regulatory, and public pressure. They introduced controls of misinformation when they felt they were forced to. Even then the White House was unsatisfied with Twitters' efforts on Covid misinformation, and there was a prolonged behind-the-scenes pressure campaign. Social media companies - old Twitter included- didn't want to be held accountable for misinformation, but did so under intense and prolonged pressure.

I dont mind X. I like being able to view news from both sides of politics and view tweets firsthand. Its not just Grok that can be used for that sort of stuff. There are many AI platforms that do exactly the same thing.

The thing is that X can have any policy it likes regarding its platform unless it strays into illegality. Then any government has a right to regulate. If X is distributing and generating pornopgraphic material and CSAM then that is not “free” in Uk law. It would be generating criminal content here.

The situation testing what the edges of liability is. If Grok turns X into a pornography/abuse generator, then it will make a lot of money. I am not sure what the liability is if your AI generates CSAM. But assuming there is evidence that it can, and that is not changed, then it’s by design, not accident. That changes the corporate responsibility and what law applies.