• atrielienz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    So. The company could have just turned over the proof to the police and let them prosecute him for CP/CSAM. Instead they decided to do this? Why? I doubt he’s got money they can take. It’s certainly not to protect the “good name”. This seems like they just want to be seen doing something and they picked the worst thing to be seen doing.

    “He used our LLM for CSAM!”

    “Why does your LLM generate CSAM?”

    • AliasAKA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think nekokoneko above has it right, trying to misattribute blame to the user. Basically, he wants to blame the user for using the service, instead of fixing the service so it doesn’t produce heinously horrible things on request. It shouldn’t work, but who knows with the amount of money he has and the lack of money on the other side. The goal is to establish a small precedent, though if someone sues xAI for making a product that makes this kind of refuse, I doubt such a precedent would hold much water.