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.
That’s satire though.
Under any reasonable court (big caveat for American courts right now) that’s free speech.
Well no, that was a practical effect.
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.
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…
You really don't think there's a 'freedom' version being mailed to the Epstein mailing list?
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.
There’s definitely models that have no problem with that yeah
everyday I thank myself for being too shut-in to post pictures of myself online
Musk offered to father her children. This was probably done deliberately.
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.
The difference between impregnating and being the father figure. He's such a piece of shit.
https://archive.is/QTpGe because its either pay walled or needs an account
thanks
I appreciate Grok for being the platonic ideal AI system. Not like these others that get little guardrails and tweaks added every time a news article hits about some inevitable fucked up output it can produce. Just pure unrefined donkey shit. 🤌
Grok has guardrails, it's just they're there for different reasons.
Oh it's refined donkey shit alright, it has guardrails just like any commercial LLM.
@[email protected] @[email protected]
Grok is not that free of guardrails.
I say as a person who sometimes have the (bad) idea of feeding every LLMs I could possibly try, with things I create (drawings, poetry, code golfing). I don't use LLMs to "create" things (they're not really that capable of real creativity, despite their pseudo-stochastic nature), I use them to parse things I created, which is a very different approach. Not Grok anymore, because I have long deleted my account there, but I used to use it.
Why do I feed my creations to LLMs, one might ask? I have my reasons: LLMs are able to connect words to other words thus giving me some unexpectedness and connections I couldn't see on my own creation, and I'm highly aware of how it's being used for training... but humans don't really value my creations given the lack of real feedback across all my works, so I don't care it's used for training. Even though I sometimes use it, I'm still a critique of LLMs, and I'm aware of both their pros and cons (more cons than pros if we consider corp LLMs).
So, back to the initial point: one day I did this disturbing and gory drawing (as usual for my occult-horror-gothic art), a man standing in formal attire with some details I'll refrain from specifying here.
ChatGPT accepted to parse it. Qwen's QVQ accepted it as well. DeepSeek's Janus also accepted to parse it.
Google's Gemini didn't, as usual: not because of the explicit horror, but because of the presence of human face, even if drawn. It refrains from parsing anything that closely resemble faces.
Anthropic's Claude wasn't involved, because I'm already aware of how "boringly puritan" it's programmed to be, it doesn't even accept conversations about demonolatry, it's more niched for programming.
But what surprised me on that day was how Grok refused to accept my drawing, and it was a middle-layer between the user and the LLM complaining about "inappropriate content".
Again, it was just a drawing, a fairly well-performed digital drawing with explicit horror, but a drawing nonetheless, and Grok's API (not Grok per se) complained about that. Other disturbing drawings of mine weren't refused at that time, just that one, I still wonder why.
Maybe these specific guardrails (against highly-explicit horror art, deep occult themes, etc) aren't there in paid tiers, but I doubt it. Even Grok (as in the "public-facing endpoint") has some puritanness on it, especially against very niche themes such as mine (occult and demonolatry, explicit Lovecraftian horror, etc).
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.
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).
So everyone is naked and without job. What would be next AI revelation ?
"... for science" - reporter
That picture is uncanny.
I wonder if grok could make some distasteful Elon deepfakes.
How is AI not buried under piles of lawsuits?
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
