Twitter is not just an AI perv tool.
They Want Any Excuse For Censorship
- Thread starter securespark
- Start date
Twitter is not just an AI perv tool.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 25,300
- Reaction score
- 5,584
- Country
Yep that is (will be) an offence.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 25,300
- Reaction score
- 5,584
- Country
neither are the 100s of other tools
It was a Mr E Musk what did it.
Good. I find the Starmer bikini photos upsetting.
Saved and will be using on the "another one" thread thank you.
You seem to know a lot about it.
Just kidding.
The objection seems to be that women and children are posting their photos on Twitter and people are using the perv tool on Twitter to undress them and then repost their photos.
I would suggest that almost everyone would condemn doing it.
Whether that justifies shutting down a discussion website is another matter entirely. Especially as other websites do the same, but the govt is picking out only the one that is against their political angle.
Whether that justifies shutting down a discussion website is another matter entirely. Especially as other websites do the same, but the govt is picking out only the one that is against their political angle.
I deleted my original post. Up to you whether you keep yours.
I've got no idea what's a harmless joke any more now we live in North Korea.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 25,300
- Reaction score
- 5,584
- Country
yet the law created states something quite different.
There is no ability to create for private use, no ability to obtain consent after the fact and nothing about the intended purpose being to cause harassment or distress.
= Bad law.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 25,300
- Reaction score
- 5,584
- Country
You're safe either way, this week.
Would you be happy with a law which banned this from happening on Twitter if it was enacted properly.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 25,300
- Reaction score
- 5,584
- Country
people shouldn't create and publish intimate images of others without their permission. This is not a new thing, the Monks of old used "art" to depict naughty nuns and monks 300 years ago. Some of it in public galleries.
I see less harm in someone downloading an image of say their favourite celebrity crush and creating some private w*** bank images of him/her in a bikini/trunks. What is the harm if they don't share it and they don't try to do someone else harm with it?
I don't think I have a problem with that. Has Twitter agreed to make those changes.
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 18,948
- Reaction score
- 1,616
- Country
Either you accept objectifying unconsenting CHILDREN and adults from being sexually pictures, or you dont.So no need to make it as broad as it is.
Data (Use and Access) Act 2025
www.legislation.gov.uk
What harm does a person do, to another if he takes a public picture of an adult and creates an image for their private use of them in underwear or whatever?
On the other hand, how does the platform know that a person in fact has the permission of the person?
Nothing wrong with ai or x.
But it doesn't or shouldn't, come with a free pass to abuse others.
Anybody, adult, that wants to pose, for free or payment should be allowed to.
Do you struggle with the difference?
