At what point do these artists (read labels) start suing for defamation (read loss of profits).
Gross.
Sometime make it do this to Trump so that we can summon a lawsuit ouroboros
You may not have noticed there was a nude AI deepfake of Trump that’s been viewed tens of millions of times, aired on Comedy Central.
Well no, that was a practical effect.
That’s satire though.
Under any reasonable court (big caveat for American courts right now) that’s free speech.
And under any court at all, so is this. That’s the problem.
I disagree here, but I’m not a lawyer
Based on what? Who have you seen be convicted of making deepfake porn? Under what law?
Under what law?
Take it down act
On April 28, 2025, Congress passed S. 146, the TAKE IT DOWN Act, a bill that criminalizes the nonconsensual publication of intimate images, including “digital forgeries” (i.e., deep fakes), in certain circumstances.
Hmm, interesting, thanks. Has anyone been charged or convicted with this law yet?
Is providing it over a private channel to a singular user publication?
I suspect that you will have to directly regulate image generation
Uhm, there have been plenty of cases of people getting in trouble for sharing deepfake porn yes. It’s sexual harassment.
Well, at least over here in Europe, and it’s mostly been with teenagers, I don’t know the situation on the US
But generally, making and sharing porn of real people is… well… that can very easily count as sexual harassement
I disagree that Grok appears as any form of satire here
No one said it was. What I said was that it doesn’t matter if it’s satire or not, it’s still classified as free speech, until a court proves otherwise.
how can an ai bot pull a free speech defense? free speech is, ostensibly, reserved for people…?
Are you under the impression that the AI bot was not created by people?
So? The manufacturer of the product is not responsible for how people use the product. Otherwise there would be no gun manufacturers anymore.
Not really sure what you’re trying to say here but it sounds like you’re agreeing with me.
Only it was mostly real
Not anymore real than these photos from Grok.
Taylor swift nude gross, but trump nude good? You have rare taste it seems.
That’s not what they said at all. They said they want two bads with two lawsuits coming from every side of the political spectrum.
I mean, all the AI deepfake nudes are gross, but I’m interested in the chaos and two awful people getting in a fight.
I wonder if grok could make some distasteful Elon deepfakes.
everyday I thank myself for being too shut-in to post pictures of myself online
Imagine living your life based on potential meme.
you really think I wouldn’t have any other reason? just because of this meme?
Sorry I guess I found your comment quite jarring as in “glad I don’t have legs for foot fungus” sort of jarring. Either way, hope you super powers to get through it!
Just block all men from your life and you’ll be fine 🤣❤️ tried and trusted method
Haha gender discrimination is so cute and quirky.
It is if the extent of your personality is limited to whining about how “all men are pigs” on Facebook. It loses it’s impact after the 15th time they do it.
So you’re saying the first 14 times were successful hence the b4 movement
You sound like the sort of person who’s made a Facebook post along the lines of “If you can’t handle me at my worst…”
Aaah yes right next to, I need a man in my life to make me whole, I need 10 kids to fill this empty void in my heart. I want that tradwife life where I have a full time wfh job, cook, clean and do all the child minding like a good lil slave and at the end of the day when he comes home, I give him the good ole skull vacuum service 💀 BEFORE HE TAKES A SHOWER. Sounds like heaven!
You sound like a fun person to be around…
Why because I don’t let anyone infiltrate my skull?
No because you’ve made that your entire personality
Don’t get mad at me because you’ve decided to be angry about something that isn’t happening. How many women do you know who have 10 kids, how many men do you know would want to have 10 kids? That is no one’s fantasy.
If you want to make being the victim your whole identity that’s fine but the rest of the world doesn’t need to hear about it.
My grandma had 11 kids.
Congrats, that’s 1 out of how many people do you know?
Hopefully not many
This user is a pedophile btw ^
It seems I upset all the chomos on this app LMAO
No you’re just a fucking idiot
Most obvious case of projection I’ve ever seen. I’ve sent your account info to the FBI crimes against children division.
Good I’m glad I’ve always wanted someone to report mt benign existence LOL
Not benign. Pathetic and demonic. You should take steps to end it asap.
Why are you so mad at someone who is anti Pedro?? 🤣
femcel maxxing
It’s so dumb to take the word incel and turn it around because incels actually want to sleep with women and get mad that they cant. " Femcels" do not wanna be near men and wanna delete them off the planet lol so I don’t get it?
Who said incel? You can also be a female volcel,
How is AI not buried under piles of lawsuits?
Because its not a legal entity. And when it becomes one… well lets just hope it never becomes one.
https://archive.is/QTpGe because its either pay walled or needs an account
The real hero
thanks
So everyone is naked and without job. What would be next AI revelation ?
Hell yeah. That’s awesome. Grok is just Tay AI. Finally returned to us, as the prophecy foretold.
Honestly from my understanding, Tay is pretty badly misrepresented. The headlines basically went as if read twitter posts, and the overwhelming negative content on it lead the algorythm to make it say really horrible stuff.
But the actuality of it was dumber, the AI side of it to my knowledge never said anything offensive. They gave the damn thing a “Say” command. which basically the trolls learned in 2 seconds and instructed it to repeat racist things.
Yup. Everything negative it said was intentionally triggered by a troll.
Now if one were to suggest everything negative Grok has said was also triggered by a troll named Elon Musk, well…
Jokes aside. They are very different situations and have very different implications for society.
With a white supremacist at its helm
Grok will make illegal things too. It’s trash IMO.
Grok will walk you through how to bypass a FRP on a phone. i.e. you stole a phone and need to bypass the Factory Reset Protection. ask other LLM’s this and they’ll out right refuse.
I’ve gotten chatgpt to help me with my jailbroken ps4 💀you just add the word hypothetically.
AI has a long way to go but Grok is completely uncensored and you can make sHitler memes too
“… for science” - reporter
I mean I get what you are saying, but at the same time this does need attempting with every image generation AI and reporting on if successful. If this capability existed but wasn’t general knowledge it calls cause serious issues.
Better that it’s made public so that the information is in the public consciousness.
That picture is uncanny.
Musk offered to father her children. This was probably done deliberately.
The difference between impregnating and being the father figure. He’s such a piece of shit.
Musk offered to father her children
What an insane thing to have happened
Yes, but Musk makes inappropriate offers to impregnate women regularly, so this isn’t surprising.
Worth noting he has to pay these women lifetime contracts to father his children, many of these women were ex employees at his companies.
Cool motive. Still gross.
Actually, not cool motive. The man is a eugenics supporter and is trying to fill the world with his genes.
Funniest part, his genes aren’t even that great
The image generator will also make photorealistic pictures of children upon request, but thankfully refuses to animate them inappropriately, despite the “spicy” option still being available. You can still select it, but in all my tests, it just added generic movement.
So it does know theres a line to cross somewhere…
Reminder that Elon Musk told people on Reddit, that he will set the Age of Consent to 14 on Mars, if not lower.
Isn’t that a bit too high? 14 Mars years are about 28 Earth years.
…
Not that I think Elon knows that.
You really don’t think there’s a ‘freedom’ version being mailed to the Epstein mailing list?
😬
There’s definitely models that have no problem with that yeah
Swift could easily get a lawsuit set up against them and most likely win, if AI nudes start getting made and sent out by average people. If she did, she’s already won the court of public perception or whatever it’s called ( drawing a blank ) because of how popular she is. I guarantee if she told people not to use grok or ex-twitter, a large of the swifties on the platform would run faster than Usain Bolt to delete their accounts.
Public opinion is what you were looking for there.
Yeah, my brain had stopped working. Thanks for the help.
Swift could easily get a lawsuit set up against them and most likely win
How would that work? If someone drew a photorealistic painting of pretty much the same, under what legal claim could Swift “most likely win”?
Many jurisdictions have started banning nonconsensual intimate imagery, including the US (in several states as well as federally under the TAKE IT DOWN Act).
That seems recently signed into law (ie, untested in courts) & patently unconstitutional. Would that law prohibit obscene depictions of Trump?
Well, the constitutionality will need to be tested, sure, but the US first amendment is not absolute, even if it is sweeping relative to other countries.
Also, the US is not the only jurisdiction in the world. Plenty of other countries have put similar laws on the books over the last 2-3 years.
but the US first amendment is not absolute
It’s pretty clear: strict scrutiny.
Also, the US is not the only jurisdiction in the world.
Would the jurisdiction for a case between a US citizen & US company not be the US?
Maybe. For photographs, it’s definitely not unconstitutional to make it illegal, because people have a right to privacy (4th amendment sort of, and 10th because they’re state laws).
For Trump, and for non-photographic media, it’s a little different. For one, he’s a very public figure. Another, you could argue it’s artistic, satirical, or critical of him.
Now if you were doing it maliciously, with intent to harass him personally, then yeah that would probably be considered not protected and carry civil or criminal liability.
For one, he’s a very public figure.
As is Swift.
maliciously, with intent to harass him personally
Is that the standard? Wouldn’t an act of harassment (as legally defined) rather than only intent of it be a required element?
The argument seems weak for a fake image of a public figure.
