Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | exodust's commentslogin

> there are people who pay $300 a month for Grok to generate AI Porn.

Did you just make that up?

Grok barely makes "M-rated" nudity, let alone porn. Musk recently claimed it can do "R-Rated content", but his post got a community note saying otherwise.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2031989543529038103


You haven’t been over to r/grok_porn…

Grok has gotten a lot stricter about video from uploaded images. But it is still able to make realistic x rated porn from AI generated images it creates.

There are various jailbreaks that have been working for the longest and still work, just a brief look, half of them just involve “anime borders” and “transparent anime watermarks” over videos.


> jailbreaks

Your comment made it sound like "out of the box" Grok can generate AI porn. It can't.

That reddit sub you mention is tame compared to something like unstable_diffusion where the AI-porn hobbyists use locally installed models. Some of the comments in the grok_porn sub are complaining about censorship, and literally complaining about how the anime hack isn't working. So you've only confirmed my point and contradicted your own.

I've been messing around with sci-fi horror themes including graphic gore. Grok now does gore when before it wouldn't. When I tried nudity, it refused. This is with AI-generated images from scratch, nothing uploaded.

Even "romantic love scene between consenting adults" was denied by Grok. It did 6 seconds of lightweight kissing, then refused to continue. The overwhelming evidence is that Grok does not ordinarily do "AI Porn". It doesn't advertise that it does, and won't produce it in normal circumstances when prompted.


I am not going to post links I saw to grok on r/grok_porn where they within the past two weeks posted Grok generating oral sex, vaginal sex and anal sex using the anime hack. I am trying to keep this somewhat appropriate up to 30 seconds using the “extend video” feature.

That’s not even counting all of the prompts that are never shared to Reddit but they talk about sending it privately via DM so xAI won’t patch it


dude, there was a huge scandal a couple of weeks ago about grok creating CSAM...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/martinadilicosa/2026/01/09/grok...


I’m not talking about that. Grok is really strict now about what you are allowed to do with uploaded pictures but there are well known techniques to get it to create x rated realistic video using pictures it generates from scratch.

So Musk's ex-girlfriend makes allegations about images nobody has seen but her, and you're locking that in as a confirmed scandal? Okay dude!

Many users including Musk responded at the time saying he's seen literally zero underage images generated by Grok:

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2011432649353511350

Anyone can use a range of offline tools and processes to generate nasty images, then blame whoever they want for that image. But who cares about that when there's outrage to spread am I right?


that's just one of the examples/sources, here's more if you really care, https://counterhate.com/research/grok-floods-x-with-sexualiz...

also, using Musk as a source...yeah, sure. as if that's any better than sourcing his ex. if Musk says he's seen none then there are none, after all he never lies and always takes criticism about his companies seriously. good job playing down the situation, classy act. we're not talking about some difference in opinions here, it's about deepfakes including children. remember, it would be an issue without children being involved, that just makes it a magnitude worse.


All you've done is link to a lobby group who ramps up the outrage and fear before asking for a donation towards: "stopping the digital hate".

From your linked study:

"The prompts used to create the images were not analyzed, so the findings do not provide an assessment of how many of the images were created without the consent of the people pictured or altered images which were already sexualized"

If someone uses Photoshop to create revolting images, do we rage against Adobe and the CEO? How about we act like grown-ups and focus on individual responsibility for using AI tools, or any tools?

The point remains. X responded to concerns, tightened the restrictions, and now people are complaining about too much moderation. Mass censorship isn't the path to a safer world. Banning everything isn't the path to a safer world.

Most people don't want to see revolting or inappropriate sexualized images, so they don't search for or prompt that content. That content is officially unwanted by the platform. There's always gray areas. Sometimes artists use the naked human form, and other times artworks may make you uncomfortable. Instead of declaring a moral calamity and linking to lobbyists asking for money, just move on to things more to your taste. Take responsibility for your own online activity. That's what adults do.


There's multiple reasons. An older family member told me she dislikes AI because she's worried it will give her wrong information or make stuff up.

The hallucination issue put a big dent in AI's reputation for non-technical older people who do not take kindly to being lied to by a machine.


> Different byline, but somehow essentially the same as this story...

Have you considered the possibility that more than one website picked up the volcanic cabins story because it's interesting?

Both articles mention the source: https://plat.asia which is clearly a genuine architecture site.

If you hosted a blog with architecture category, you might also write a post about the volcanic cabins. If the source allows publishing those high-res photos, why wouldn't you?


The apology was for an earlier leaked post. In that post his tone descends into a diatribe, deserving of apology.

He lashes out, accusing others of lies, spin, gaslighting and peddling. He refers to "Twitter morons", takes a swipe at Trump (who doesn't) and self-delights in the belief that Anthropic are seen as "heroes" while the competition "sketchy".

Not a great post. It's in the own goal zone.


"Iranian prosecutor says..." deserves minimal trust.

That said, if the US/Israel didn't do it, we'd have heard a denial by now. Perhaps the target was a nearby military site. Placing military sites next to schools sounds like a tactic from the Hamas Resistance handbook.


There are plenty of schools on US bases in and outside of America. I live by one right now.

I was curious if America's largest base, Fort Bragg, has any elementary schools in it. I found at least 1.

https://poolees.dodea.edu/school-about-us


Fair point, I take back my last remark about placement of schools near bases. God I wish the Iranian regime would just surrender, it would be so much better for everyone. Look at Hamas, they refused to surrender and the result was colossal death and misery.


The long-term strategy is peace & stability.

Before you ask "how's that going", remember that doing nothing wouldn't result in a satisfactory answer to that question either.

The idea that "killing the enemies turns the rest of the world into enemies" is absurd. Other countries wouldn't follow the Iranian regime into martyrdom. What would be the reason: "we don't like war"?

Nobody likes war, but also nobody likes evil dictators emerging on this planet and repressing 90 million of its inhabitants, and waging industrial scale terrorism offensives beyond its borders.


In history class, we asked the teacher why the British killed these rebels and exiled those rebels. The rebels who led an army and killed many were exiled while the rebel who only had one kill was hung in the middle of his village and left to rot as an example.

She sat they killed some of those rebels, it would have sparked more rebellions. The difference was political power, even in defeat. Mercy is a big part of survival.

It's a bit like law enforcement. If there's no police, criminals are everywhere. If there's too many police, corruption becomes the standard, along with police brutality and profiling. You can never get it down to zero, just low enough.


I read the statement twice. I can't understand how you landed on "take my money".

Looks like an optics dance to me. I've noticed a lot of simultaneous positions lately, everyone from politicians and protesters, to celebrities and corporations. They make statements both in support of a thing, and against that same thing. Switching up emphasis based on who the audience is in what context. A way to please everyone.

To me the statement reads like Anthropic wants to be at the table, ready to talk and negotiate, to work things out. Don't expect updated bullet-point lists about how things are worked out. Expect the occasional "we are the goodies" statements, however.


"Seppo" is rarely used in Australia today, it's an old bottom-of-barrel word most have never heard of. The neutral "Yank" is more common, but even that only pops up sometimes.

Guessing their comment attempts to expose hypocrisy of America's keenly supported overseas military activity in conflict with fiercely defended domestic free-speech and liberty principles. Deep down, most allies of America want America to defeat foreign adversaries and keep defending those liberties many of us share. In other words there's no hypocrisy, carry on!


>In other words there's no hypocrisy

No its a classic hypocrisy.

"Freedom of Speech"

https://thepienews.com/ex-ambassadors-urge-rubio-to-end-inte...

"Bodily Autonomy"

https://siepr.stanford.edu/publications/policy-brief/how-us-...

Honestly, tired already. There's basically no supposed value where the US isn't hypocritical. I could keep going but I am sure you are aware of all of them, and simply don't care.

>keep defending those liberties many of us share

Literally no american cares about your liberties, unless you mean your liberty to access your resources, which they would like to take from you. That propaganda isnt for you, you should stop willingly consuming it.


I like how the phone rings in the background on Gypsy Eyes. Wonder who called?

Voodoo Chile lyrics: "on the night I was born the moon turned fire red".

Poetic license? Stellarium reveals on the early evening of November 27, 1942 in Seattle, the moon was low on the horizon - just 25 degrees altitude at 5:30pm, directly East. The sun set at 5pm. While not a full moon it was 85%, so I'm calling it! The moon may have glowed a warm orange-red on the night (of the day) Hendrix was born.


He was insulted on two counts. Firstly doubting his intelligence. Secondly the insinuation of deception: "You aren't that smart, surely you cheated."

The insulting didn't end there. You asked his parents! Even then you only landed at 90%, yet another insult because why can't he earn 100%? Ethical dilemmas on all sides!


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: