This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
I don't see how limiting it to paid subscribers is much of an improvement. Any amount of this material should be a punishable offense, shouldn't it?
Someone needs to start making images of Elon fucking Starmer in the arse. Maybe then he'll do something about it.
You would get thrown in jail, rightfully, for doing this once.
Corporation does it by the truckload and they are politely told to please stop, if they don't mind.
Not even the trivial, meaningless fines we're used to reading about.
This world is broken.
FBI is usually the biggest distributors of csam.
Limited to paying subscribers. So the only thing stopping people from creating CSAM, and fake sex pics of famous people is $8 a month?
Yeah... that'll show them.
But it will certainly drive up subscriptions 😉 ... 🤮
With US oligarchs "threats" and discussions do not work. Only action and the type of action that hurts them personally.
Threats do work when delivered properly. See how the EU forced Apple into moving to USB-C or opening up sideloading/alternate app markets.
You just need to have weight to throw around behind your threats. The EU has weight. The UK alone? Hah.
Cynical take: They only did it openly to draw attention to it & pull in more subscribers. Because you can be sure Xhitter's clientele loves that feature.
"image generation and editing are currently limited to paying subscribers," a change from the previous setup in which anyone could summon the system by tagging it in a post and asking for a picture.
Seems like this has some teeth at least. Elon usually doesn't budge at these sorts of legislation changes but this cleary has him a little nervous at least.
Perhaps, but if anything they should have used this as a cover to ban twitter. I do not find American style ostentatious "freedom polemics" to be convincing, but on top of that Musk has been found to meddle in local politics to benefit the far right and promote UK criminals.
Still waiting for an actual use case of image/video gen that isn't just for cheap assets or pure malice
But... those ARE the only two use cases.
Don't be so negative! It's also found a huge market in scams. Both for stealing celebrity likenesses, and making pictures and video of nonexistent products.
I'm gonna say that still counts as "cheap assets"
Imagine being on the team at Twitter that had to work on this tool. Fuck me. You must hate your every living minute.
Ok so we need to define the acceptance criteria. GIVEN I am a user WHEN I click the button THEN grok should remove clothes from the image. Great. Any non functionals? Nope. Ok cool. Ship it.
Anyone with a conscience or morals has surely quit or been fired from that hellhole by now.
You assume they have morals, yet they work for X on an advanced feature
rule 34. yeah not her
Sheesh. So far I thought it's just one of those things Xhitter's AI image generator can be told to do. But to have a specific ~~button~~ feature ... 🤮 Was it point-and click even?
Nothing says "we're for male sexists only, and we know it" like adding a specific ~~button~~ feature.
Is there a specific "undress" button? I tried looking for proof that it exists but couldn't find any (my searching skills clearly need work). Could you please share a screenshot or point me to a place where I can confirm that it exists?
It's not a physical button, but you could reply to any photo of any person (usually women, sometimes underage) and say "@grok put her in a micro bikini" and grok would happily dress down the person in the original image
sorry, I meant 'AI feature that "undressed" people on command' (from the article). No idea if it's an actual button, I don't use Xhitter. But I edited my comment now.
