Who doesn’t agree with this? All sexualised AI images are unacceptable, I don’t care where they are.
SP1570 on
Anyway JD only uses it for sexualised couch images…
birdinthebush74 on
Vance supports US abortion bans that force abused children to give birth.
Darkone539 on
Looks like the government is doing work for when Ofcom ban X. That’s good at least.
If we are hit with a backlash so be it, but this needs to be handled. Musk is already claiming people are calling for “censorship” and it’s a free speech issue.
[deleted] on
[deleted]
latenightbus on
I can’t wait for Musk’s UK acolytes doing the ‘CP is a free speech issue’ stuff.
OrangeLemonLime8 on
Can someone explain it to me
Is the issue using real people and changing them, like the story of people being undressed
Or is it purely AI? Like, a person created out of thin air that doesn’t exist and is in a sexualised pic?
daiwilly on
Anyone who thinks this nothing more than words is naive!
Criflly on
This is pretty funny. Just stating this is driving a wedge between Musk and the US administration. And that is a good thing.
CaptMelonfish on
Sexualised images of couches however are fine apparently.
YUNoPamping on
We are approaching a time when anybody who wants to generate such images will be able to and the only thing that could potentially stop it is an draconian approach to regulation of the internet (i.e. where banning X and restricting access to VPNs would be the tip of the iceberg – an even more stringent version of what you can see in Cuba and China).
Our current crop of politicians are not capable of wrestling with issues of this magnitude. The best they can do is play “whack-a-mole” with perceived transgressors.
Gold_Motor_6985 on
I am glad our overlords are sympathetic to our cause I guess?
CrispoClumbo on
Just fucking ban it, the less we’re exposed to America’s propaganda tool, the better. They are not our ally.
Ironrats on
I actually used one of my own holiday images, was wearing jeans and a shirt with my backpack on and it was able to put me into swimsuits (kept my backpack) and I must say it looked good…
Now, if it could do a decent job like that for me, I don’t even wanna know how much more it can do, but I’d be concerned with having such fakes of others on my PC or search incase it came up in future, like no thanks.
Rialagma on
Aren’t these maga idiots meant to be ‘christian fundamentalists’? Did they forget the Christian part?
BunAZoot420 on
Every time “X is getting banned” comes up, the excuse gets rolled out that it’s purely about AI generating inappropriate or harmful content as if other platforms like chat gpt and other AI tools somehow don’t have the exact same capabilities, moderation challenges, or loopholes.
CSAM on major platforms is taken extremely seriously and is immediately filtered and removed.
The real reason is likely political. X gives a major platform to people criticizing things like Digital ID, corruption within government etc and leaders like Keir Starmer have already been caught lying on their own tweets. Removing X without a doubt dramatically reduces speech freedoms for people who question government policies
Let’s be honest: if the issue were simply “AI can generate bad stuff,” then half the internet would be banned already. Every major AI platform faces the same risks. Every social platform already battles illegal content. and yet only X gets singled out like this, and we’re expected to believe it’s purely a safety decision with no politics, power struggles, or selective enforcement involved?
People deserve a more honest discussion. Either:
– Acknowledge it’s about broader political, regulatory, and control issues
or
– Admit it’s selective enforcement rather than a unique threat.
But pretending it’s just about “AI images” when the same thing exists everywhere else is disingenuous and frankly insulting to ask of our intelligence tbh
TheCharalampos on
Vance would 100% support it if it benefited him in any way.
Logic-DL on
Does Vance always have a permanently disgusted expression on his face or is that just the cameraman getting an amazingly good shot of Vance looking at a black man with disgust?
BlueMoonButterflies on
ASK YOURSELF: Does NOT the problem exist with “the people of the UK” who generate these images and not the platform they use to do it? X can better modify but the UK is still left with their perverted people who will only find another platform to make the same mistakes again. The UK should fix their own problem instead of the blame game with X!
Jimmy-M-420 on
A normal person would be horrified to think they’ve made a tool for generating nude sexualized images of children, and immediately take the tool offline until its fixed
Mid-Pri6170 on
they even sexualised David Lammy??
is nothing sacred to these pervs???
navagon on
And yet the rest of the paedophile party want to sanction the UK for also finding them unacceptable.
Background-Gas8109 on
Vance personally searches for AI sexualised pictures of couches.
nskmadbadger on
Lammy and Vance have some weird bromance going on hence him standing up for him. Spent a lot of time together fishing as I recall when Vance was in the UK on holiday.
24 Comments
Who doesn’t agree with this? All sexualised AI images are unacceptable, I don’t care where they are.
Anyway JD only uses it for sexualised couch images…
Vance supports US abortion bans that force abused children to give birth.
Looks like the government is doing work for when Ofcom ban X. That’s good at least.
If we are hit with a backlash so be it, but this needs to be handled. Musk is already claiming people are calling for “censorship” and it’s a free speech issue.
[deleted]
I can’t wait for Musk’s UK acolytes doing the ‘CP is a free speech issue’ stuff.
Can someone explain it to me
Is the issue using real people and changing them, like the story of people being undressed
Or is it purely AI? Like, a person created out of thin air that doesn’t exist and is in a sexualised pic?
Anyone who thinks this nothing more than words is naive!
This is pretty funny. Just stating this is driving a wedge between Musk and the US administration. And that is a good thing.
Sexualised images of couches however are fine apparently.
We are approaching a time when anybody who wants to generate such images will be able to and the only thing that could potentially stop it is an draconian approach to regulation of the internet (i.e. where banning X and restricting access to VPNs would be the tip of the iceberg – an even more stringent version of what you can see in Cuba and China).
Our current crop of politicians are not capable of wrestling with issues of this magnitude. The best they can do is play “whack-a-mole” with perceived transgressors.
I am glad our overlords are sympathetic to our cause I guess?
Just fucking ban it, the less we’re exposed to America’s propaganda tool, the better. They are not our ally.
I actually used one of my own holiday images, was wearing jeans and a shirt with my backpack on and it was able to put me into swimsuits (kept my backpack) and I must say it looked good…
Now, if it could do a decent job like that for me, I don’t even wanna know how much more it can do, but I’d be concerned with having such fakes of others on my PC or search incase it came up in future, like no thanks.
Aren’t these maga idiots meant to be ‘christian fundamentalists’? Did they forget the Christian part?
Every time “X is getting banned” comes up, the excuse gets rolled out that it’s purely about AI generating inappropriate or harmful content as if other platforms like chat gpt and other AI tools somehow don’t have the exact same capabilities, moderation challenges, or loopholes.
CSAM on major platforms is taken extremely seriously and is immediately filtered and removed.
The real reason is likely political. X gives a major platform to people criticizing things like Digital ID, corruption within government etc and leaders like Keir Starmer have already been caught lying on their own tweets. Removing X without a doubt dramatically reduces speech freedoms for people who question government policies
Let’s be honest: if the issue were simply “AI can generate bad stuff,” then half the internet would be banned already. Every major AI platform faces the same risks. Every social platform already battles illegal content. and yet only X gets singled out like this, and we’re expected to believe it’s purely a safety decision with no politics, power struggles, or selective enforcement involved?
People deserve a more honest discussion. Either:
– Acknowledge it’s about broader political, regulatory, and control issues
or
– Admit it’s selective enforcement rather than a unique threat.
But pretending it’s just about “AI images” when the same thing exists everywhere else is disingenuous and frankly insulting to ask of our intelligence tbh
Vance would 100% support it if it benefited him in any way.
Does Vance always have a permanently disgusted expression on his face or is that just the cameraman getting an amazingly good shot of Vance looking at a black man with disgust?
ASK YOURSELF: Does NOT the problem exist with “the people of the UK” who generate these images and not the platform they use to do it? X can better modify but the UK is still left with their perverted people who will only find another platform to make the same mistakes again. The UK should fix their own problem instead of the blame game with X!
A normal person would be horrified to think they’ve made a tool for generating nude sexualized images of children, and immediately take the tool offline until its fixed
they even sexualised David Lammy??
is nothing sacred to these pervs???
And yet the rest of the paedophile party want to sanction the UK for also finding them unacceptable.
Vance personally searches for AI sexualised pictures of couches.
Lammy and Vance have some weird bromance going on hence him standing up for him. Spent a lot of time together fishing as I recall when Vance was in the UK on holiday.