I can tell, you don’t understand what’s going on and that’s scary. Unfortunately, it would still be scary if you did. But at least you would be able to have a positive effect on the world for the better.

How so?

I see. I have some doubts about the motivation of these people, too. But regulators are going after X.

Consider that the chatcontrol equivalent would be going after services that don’t spy enough on their users.

You think the paper is fraud?

Yeah. I understand what you mean. That is simply not true. Ok, teachable moment.

In Germany, that slogan is considered a Hamas slogan. Hamas has been classified as an extremist organization. That means that using its slogans and symbols is illegal under the same laws that make Nazi slogans and symbols illegal. That’s the hate speech and illegal content that online platforms are supposed to remove.

Failing to crack down on hate speech is one of the biggest complaints against X. If you demand that authorities to enforce EU platform laws harder, then what happens is that this slogan is suppressed harder. You understand?

Prompts are in the appendix: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.16800

I don’t know how far you get on the free tier but it should be at least enough for a proof of principle; to get other people to chip in. You didn’t have qualms demanding other people should do this for free.

Mind that this is a serious GDPR violation in Europe. So there will be serious pressure on AI companies to prevent this kind of use.

And how does that work legally?

I think you are just not making any sense.

Hmm. Maybe but it is not the same problem as those discussed in OP. I also have some doubts about the paper, but that’s another story. You could try it out?

Uh. So… Prosecuting bad. Not prosecuting those who do not cooperate with the prosecutors also bad because hypocrisy.

I think if any other (smaller) site were continually posting CSAM without moderation, it would be banned.

On what legal grounds would that happen?

Uh. You do understand that this law breaking includes not cracking down hard enough on illegal content? Like that Hamas slogan?

What is?

I don’t think you can do literally the same thing on the Epstein files. Maybe I’m misunderstanding what you have in mind.

There were reports of people trying to unredact the files almost immediately.

This is about GDPR. A German court recently made a similar judgment wrt TikTok, but that is being appealed.

I remember a guy about 3 years ago trying that grift with images. Went nowhere because the images it flagged as the “source” looked nothing like the generated images. In music, it might be more successful. Marvin Gaye’s estate showed the way.

Hmm. What are the chances that they manage to sneak such a fraudulent scheme past courts or lawmakers?

The background is that French law requires ISPs to retain the IPs of their customer for some time. That way, an IP address can be associated with a customer.

If I download music in a Starbucks, can they fine the Starbucks CEO then?

A CEO is an employee. You generally can’t sue employees for this sort of thing. It may be possible to sue the company as a whole for enabling the copyright infringement, but that’s not to do with this case. Perhaps in the future, operators of WiFi-hotspots will be required to use something like Youtube’s Content ID system.

Anyway I hope I hope online artists, and authors are able to use this to sue AI companies for stealing their copyrighted works.

They can use this to go after “pirates”. It’s got nothing to do with AI.

So true.

This talking point, too, is so infuriatingly silly:

I mean yes I know you’re going to say socialism is about workers getting fair pay

Workers, by definition, don’t own what they produce. Copyrights are intellectual property; business capital. Somehow, capitalists are workers in the minds of these people. This is your mind on trickle-down economics.