So "X" - nothing to see here. Elon's in control - Part XXX

Of course not, you utter moron. It's already illegal, and the action that X has taken will make it easier to find people who try to do it.

Mod - warned for personal abuse

Sorry I'm not indulging your bad faith stupidity on this.

As I said already, the post I replied to and the post that poster replied to had nothing to do with child sexual abuse. Nobody has time to reply to every single other post on a thread. I don't anyway.

So, anyone who asks another poster in that context - "Are you pro CSA (child sexual abuse) material? Do you think tools that generate it should be legal?" is not arguing in good faith. The simplest explanation is that they are using understandable concern about CSAM as part of a wider censorship agenda.

They don't have to accept untraceable payment methods. Anti money laundering laws already provides them with the ability (if they choose) to know who they are dealing with. As I said above, nobody has the time to reply to all posts. It's you who's being disingenuous, mischaracterising the X move, and that "hitching your trailer to CSAM" slur.

If you bothered to read my first reply to you you would see I am calling for an end to these non-consensual deepfake images as well as easier enforcement of laws against CSAM. So, you're just playing the same silly bugger game as the other two. Bye now!

It certainly shouldn't have been allowed to get to this situation. While CSAM can be generated by all kinds of software and other tools, it's so much easier with AI. I don't think anyone is saying X are any kind of victim. That senior people in his safeguarding team are leaving the company is not a good look, and probably means regulation is required, potentially up to banning the generation of this kind of imagery. Musk is saying that the processing cost required to do this filtering is prohibitive, but I don't think that is a persuasive argument in principle. They need to do much more.

Verification of users through credit card details is still a helpful step towards that goal (rather than "monetisation" as others claim). You might as well argue that stolen credit cards makes the inconvenience imposed by anti-money laundering laws not worthwhile. But, I don't hear people making that argument.

"Musk is saying that the processing cost required to do this filtering is prohibitive, but I don't think that is a persuasive argument in principle. They need to do much more."

Really? The world's richest man who is on track to become a trillionaire and who was responsible for gutting most of the team who moderated such material from appearing on the site at all (even before "Grok" there were times when CSAM was being posted on the site taking advantage of how the moderating teams were greatly reduced), thinks the cost of stopping his AI machine from producing CSAM is "prohibitive"?

Maybe he could raise money by charging people to watch him stick a serrated knife up his own arsehole. Because I would gladly f*cking contribute. I'll even provide the knife so the world's richest man doesn't have to spend any of his own money.

So, selling people a tool to commit a crime, but it's okay because they can identify the people engaging in it after the fact.

Nothing fetishising about it. However, "Go f*ck yourself with a rusty steak knife" is often my initial thought when informed of anything Musk does or says.

The world's richest man saying it's too expensive to stop his AI model from being able to produce CSAM absolutely warrants a "Go f*ck yourself with a rusty steak knife".

If anything, I was being kind by negating the rust.