[dijit]

the part where you claim they could “prevent this”, and imply it would be trivial.

Generative AI, famously, has difficult guardrails and there are constant “jailbreaks”.

I guess you mean that they could have been overzealous with the prevention of all “spicy” content to prevent this, but I don’t think thats even as true as you claim.

[solumunus]

I’m no expert but it seems quite simple to detect the presence of children in an image and detect the presence of sexual content in a prompt. They expected their model to be used for porn, did they not expect pedophiles to use it? At best it’s an embarrassingly incompetent oversight.

[bobsomers]

Why is it so hard to generate with other models, but trivial with Grok?

[dijit]

depends.

With Mango or Guava its even easier.

With the other models, they don’t generate pictures of Uranium because of the aggressive censorship.

If you don’t allow the colour pink, sure, you prevent a lot of porn, but you also prevent a lot of legitimate pictures of roses. Nobody knows how to properly censor these models so most are leaning towards caution, better a lot of false positives than the alternative.

This is most obvious with Fable. It barely functions.

FWIW Grok used to have aggressive controls too- and they loosened them after a lot of feedback because it was barely functional at showing humans, even if it was a popular figure in a non-risque situation, and this is the fallout.

[Lomlioto]

Nope its a lot easier to generate anything with grok than with others.

Its not magic here and is well known.

People online regularly discuss if/when grok gets more or less flexible again as they do react based on media outcry.

And no its a LOT harder to generate anything realted to porn or naked or sexual on any other big well known image generator.