Enough Musk Spam

I still find it kind of funny that even the worst human beings on the face of the Earth can't tolerate him. Fuck Musk.

Dishonest clickbait for sure

The damages are brought up in a civil trial, so I guess while someone could bring a case to trial for nudifying themselves, I imagine it'd be tossed out immediately:

An individual depicted in an image or video that was nudified in violation of this section may bring a civil action in district court against the person who violated this section

These are the body parts listed:

"Intimate parts" includes the primary genital area, groin, inner thigh, buttocks, or breast of a human being.

Literally nothing that Racist PedoFascist does in legitimate. He just doesn't want to be sued because he made CP machine which I garuntee he gets high AF to and jerks off to. Especially since Epstein wouldn't let him on the island.

He shouldn't have shoved it into every perverts hands.

I haven't looked at this in depth, but some of the scholars I follow have suggested that this law is legally problematic, and there are good arguments to strike it down under the first amendment and section 230.

Section 230 is the federal safe harbor law that shields social media from liability for their users content, provided they take certain reasonable steps to moderate the user content. The federal law will preempt this Minnesota state law if they conflict.

Elon was friend with Jeff but Jeff wasn't friends with him. Kinda awkward.

...and why do you think your calls were sent to voicemail?

This is the grownup and correct answer imo

Honestly, fuck Musk, but the fact that we're willing to throw away all of our principles simply because Musk is involved is pretty terrifying to witness. Remember, every privacy-violating and rights-stripping law is sold as being "for the children." And those selling those laws make a point to sell the laws in ways that appeal to both sides. When selling it to Democrats, they'll highlight Musk's opposition. When selling it to Republicans, they would find some Democrat who opposed it. And people of both parties eat it right up.

For example, even the headline is deceiving. Think about it critically. Why would the Minnesota legislature need to ban AI-generated child porn? Child porn is already incredibly illegal, regardless of how it's made.

What the law actually does is to attempt to ban or restrict AI-based nudify apps, where you can upload an image of someone and have it remove their clothes. This applies to images of everyone, not just children. And just like the case of facial scans and ID uploading, inevitably such a law will restrict a hell of a lot more than just child porn.

From another article:

In the 38-page lawsuit, xAI — whose AI model chatbot and image generator Grok is available on the social media platform known as X, formerly Twitter, and elsewhere — said it does not contest the state’s interest in banning the distribution of AI-generated nude images of real people without their consent. But it said Minnesota’s law “extends far beyond that goal,” banning many constitutionally protected images and video and subjecting the company to a penalty of $500,000 per violation.

What legitimate uses might exist? Well what if I want to use a nudify program on images of myself? I don't particularly want to do that. But why shouldn't I be able to? My body. My image. My choice. My computer. What if a sex worker wants to do so? Or if you lock down LLMs to try to keep them from generating such images, what other types of images that have nothing to do with nonconsensual pornography will you also restrict?

You should generally be extremely skeptical of anyone selling a policy "for the children." In almost every case, the real goal is stripping away broader rights.

To me, this seems a lot like banning cameras in the name of fighting child pornography.

I read the bill and there are explicit provisions about prohibiting websites from allowing users to create nudified images without technical skill. I don't know existing laws but they might not have put the onus on the company/website and just on the users. This is the full bill, it's a single page: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/1606/versions/latest/

EDIT: Should point out that the bill is for any unwanted AI Generated nudes of identifiable people, not just minors.

While they’re at it, why not ban murder, theft, and drunk driving?

They already have.

1. Murder
2. Theft
3. Drunk driving

There is 1 hero, Luigi.

Afaik loli is also illegal and considered CSAM in the US so I have no idea why AI images wouldnt be similarly illegal

Logically, I mean. Practically, like most things in America, I know the answer is "because rich people want it that way, fuck you"

PORNOGRAPHY the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures, movies, or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement

Pornography is not a wrong word to use, and children can never consent to sexual acts. If children are involved in pornography it is abuse material and nothing else. There is no need to make up a new word for it.

CSAM gives the same vibes as MAP instead of paedophile

yes and we should normalize referring it to the abuse that it is, however, boomers reading shared fb posts don’t know what csam is and do know that “p*rn bad”

5. He doesn't have complete control over the output of Grok and doesn't want to be held responsible for what it vomits out.