Despite a lawsuit from xAI, a Minnesota ban on apps that allow users to “nudify” images can move forward, according to NBC News. U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank’s ruling focused as much on the timing of xAI’s lawsuit as on the substance of the law itself. Frank wrote that xAI filed its request for a temporary restraining order “on July 29, 2026, nearly three months after the law was signed, and only three days before the law is set to take effect” on August 1.
How DARE Democrats NOT Let us make CHILD PORN!
-Elon Musk!
Hey, there is at least ONE racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, libertarian representative from Kentucky that ALSO happens to not be ok with child porn and pedophiles.
Like, the bar is so fucking low that Thomas fucking Massie is at the top of it in that party.
Like, I think we might need some reeducation camps at some point guys. We can make them more comfortable and humane than “gulags” or whatever. But, what the fuck do we do with these people otherwise? Seriously, I want to know. What else can undo this level of rot in our society?
You’ll never completely be rid of it because humans are wired to be tribal and we find tribes based on what sports team we root for or what college we went to or what clothes we wear… or the color of our skin or the kinds of foods we like or who we are attracted to.
I have an intense dislike of anyone who voted for this mess, and I don’t really have the energy to invest to hate anyone, but the closest I come is every last member of the Trump clan (not the niece or whatever, just the people in his inner circle).
Hate and fear and ignorance are always going to be part of humanity.
How wild it is to cheer for broad censorship, but here I am cheering.
This crosses a line that I think doesn’t quite qualify this as censorship. It’s like the phrase “your rights end where mine begin”. It’s not within your rights to view people nude, especially on the fucking interwebs, without their consent.
I should not be able to exercise my rights if doing so directly violates yours. I think that is at the root of a lot of law.
yes, and editing an image does not change anything about the objects that reflected the light into the camera.
Except for their modesty, dignity, privacy, agency, reputation… and the fact that they are literally being objectified, as you so conveniently worded it, instead of human beings who will be effected by these things, as well as those who view it.
I think I’m okay with censoring the imaginary bits of private people.
Those were already illegal in Minnesota. This is a law that goes further and bans services or “software” that has the ability to remove clothing from images of people.
And especially children.
I’m fine with allowing it with specific consent of the parties involved. And no option to shift the responsibility onto the user. So fine the company for every time there isn’t. Doubly so if it’s use becomes abusive. Jail if it’s children.
LLMs have never displayed the capability to reject requests on a moral basis, but if such a hypothetical service existed then sure. (It can’t because it’s entirely uneconomical compared to just having a consenting party undress in the first place).
That’s what I mean. Even with guardrails, people. Will find a way around it. Fine the companies and they will find a solution. Make the economic consequences a reason to. And don’t allow them to shift reaponsibility, is the main part.
The problem is the child porn part, I think it would be better to prevent it entirely rather than wait for a chance to arrest and prosecute them. Allowing it to happen seems the same as encouraging and enabling the behavior which would then become a habbit.
cool. now make elon pay for the water treatment plant in memphis.
Musk after not getting a response to his wildest party request to Epstein:
Do you suppose they brought this lawsuit because ultimately the regime wants the federal moritorium on AI lawsuits to go before the corrupt Supreme Court?
