@papapishu.bsky.social:
The automated sexual abuse that Musk is doing right now should be national news. People should be going to prison for this shit. The logical conclusion to generative image creation and the internet, pure public automatic violence. Every Pizzagate fear just out in the open.
@sunnydarkgreen.bsky.social:
how long before America’s paedophile-in-chief makes CSAM protected 1A speech?
I expect him to legalize kid rape soon, and criminalize consent, legalizing rape of women.
@bookjockeyalex.bsky.social:
“Academics literally cannot make genAI go away” we also can’t make underage drinking go away and we’re not advocating for installing bar carts in every classroom.
@gilduran.com:
Corrupt tech billionaires are buying power to tilt the world in their favor.
Even the co-founder of Y Combinator is saying it.
The radical death cult rising from Silicon Valley venture capital is metastasizing rapidly.
It’s an existential threat to democracy and humanity.
Paul Graham, Y Combinator co-founder, posts:
The rational fear of those who dislike economic inequality is that the rich will convert their economic power into political power: that they’ll tilt elections, or pay bribes for pardons, or buy up the news media to promote their views.
I used to be able to claim that tech billionaires didn’t actually do this — that they just wanted to refine their gadgets. But unfortunately in the current administration we’ve seen all three.
@parismarx.com:
the platform infused with a bot that generates csam? yeah that should totally keep operating within our borders. imagine if a broadcaster did something similar. they’d never get away with it.
@parismarx.com:
great job to all these media organizations misleading readers into believing the grok AI bot is in control, not the people turning the dials behind the scenes.In my view of reading reporting on rapists and courts more often than not letting the rapists go, corp and gov’t media are keen rape-enablers.
we’re three years into this wave of ai hype. how are they still so bad at this?
it’s incredible how a full blown nazi like elon musk still gets treated with kid gloves by so much of the press, especially now that he’s not at donald trump’s side any longer
@gitremote.bsky.social:
You can’t even trust @reuters.com anymore.The world couldn’t trust most corp media since rapist Trump’s first term, our corrupt kid-rape enabling media are big part of the disgusting reason so many kids get raped with so many of their rapists set free, or not charged at all, and why a known rapist mobster stupid failure became president, twice! Homo rapiens
Reuters thinks an LLM:
- is self-aware (has a concept of self in relation to the world)
- knows which company trained it, as if it watched as an outside observer
- actively communicates with a company that froze and versioned its weights weeks ago
@alexwinter.com:
This is an outrageous abdication of journalistic duty. Grok’s apology was prompted by a human, as was its equally vehement self-defense. People are willingly hurling themselves into the AI trashbin at the bidding of oligarchs who will happily remove them from their jobs.
@arkenor.bsky.social:
Every woman in the political and media class who posts there has probably had deepfake Grokporn made of her by now.
@parismarx.com:
i was going to joke that was only supposed to happen on elon’s personal version of grok, but this is so vile i couldn’t bring myself to suggest this is in any way worth laughing about. they should be held to account for creating a csam bot.
@alanpx.bsky.social:
“Grok says” headline is also deflecting from “We don’t give a shit what horrors our plagiarism machine churns out”
@bhaggart.bsky.social:
A story about how genAI is leading to wasted time, misinformation, criminal charges and gumming up the justice system. But that goes on to assert that: “AI has the potential to improve access to justice by allowing people to tap into a wealth of information and assistance in organizing their case”.
As many have noticed, “potential” does a lot of heavy lifting in stories about genAI harms. It seems a lot of people believe that genAI‘s deficiencies — confabulations presented in a convincing way — are bugs that will be ironed out, not fundamental features that come with the technology.
This is supposed to be a productivity-enhancing technology. So it’s worth pointing out that the proposed solution — getting a lawyer to check everything genAI produces for falsehoods and misinformation — actually decreases productivity. It’s a huge waste of everyone’s time.
@sioflynn.bsky.social:
AI Con.
Snake Oil
@harmscommitted.com:
“Canada is one of Palantir’s top funders.”even though, Palantir, the most evil company on earth, serves Israel’s genocide, along with Herr Hideous “christian” Harper and his kid murdering AWZ
“Public Sector Pension Investment Board and the Canadian Pension Plan are major shareholders.”
“[I]ncentive for governments to look the other way. Jeopardize oversight? That might hurt pension returns.”
***
@ketanjoshi.co:
just so it’s clear: this is the exact core function of genAI
Fascist government, legal-judicial industry and climate deniers love it because it can produce the aesthetics of knowledge without any actual tendency towards truth. It is automated denialism.
Shame on every climate scientist promoting its use (there are lots)Lots of lazy greedy corrupt shit in Homo naziens
Without exaggeration, there has never been a major loss that has been so self-inflicted and openly welcomed as machine-generated lies, mainly because it appeals to big male egos and self-interest masses of fat male (and female) egos and selfishness in the legal-judicial industrythrough chatbot sycophancy and those personalities have had the biggest platforms
sorry to grimpost so soon into the year but we truly gotta fight back against the people who are proudly encouraging use of the mistake generator and that’s going to mean criticising some people we formerly respected as people who like the idea of science or truth or evidence
conrgats to everyone involved in normalising and promoting these systems in the climate science / academia space. You have to carry this on your shoulders for the rest of your careers, enjoy it
It has been a truly upsetting revelation how many people who I thought cared about disinformation, advocating for science, etc just flipped in 0.002 microseconds after a tech company programmed a chatbot to tell them how great their questions areJust watch the damage done to innocent Canadians and our water, air, land, homes, etc, when AI feeds the fucking over-bloated egos of our lawyers and judges
@costasamaras.com:
Bob and I were among the hundreds of researchers that were supposed to conduct the 6th U.S. National Climate Assessment. Now it looks like they’re gonna produce it with a few people and Grok? Communities need rigorous and accurate information about climate change. This will put communities at risk.
***
@kiraisgr8.bsky.social:
white supremacy thrives on the appearance of knowledge and science, it’s why they adore ‘race science’ and misformed understanding of gender so much. something that can create pages of science-shaped garbage in support of anything they can think of is everything they’ve ever wanted
@drmel.bsky.social:
Indeed. Which is why Elno is still a member of the Royal Society, which has a looooong history of eugenics / race ‘science’
@raphlife.bsky.social:
Techbros seem to love Tolkien, so here’s an analogy to help you understand what genAI is.
GenAI is The One Ring. You think your use is justified, b/c you don’t have evil in your heart.
But it came from evil, it is intended for evil purpose, & anything you do with it will be twisted to that end.
@masksaregood.myatproto.social:
“Fascist government and climate deniers love it because it can produce the aesthetics of knowledge without any actual tendency towards truth.”
Absolutely brilliantly put.
@eriknordman.bsky.social:
I like this framing. Chatbots are “indifferent to truth.”
“ChatGPT is at minimum a soft bullshitter or a bullshit machine, because if it is not an agent then it can neither hold any attitudes towards truth nor towards deceiving hearers about its (or, perhaps more properly, its users’) agenda.”
@maksympolyakov.bsky.social 6/15/2024:
“ChatGPT is bullshit”
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5
@rockytech.bsky.social:
The ultra wealthy fascists want to create their own reality so they can control the population to do whatever they want.
@emmabrody.bsky.social:
·
Musk’s venture is pumping tons of pollutants into the Memphis air thru their gas turbines. He relentlessly denies the harm he’s causing.
Right next to a Black neighborhood.
@lorak.bsky.social:
Elon Musk’s XAI faced a huge backlash after its Grok chatbot generated and spread explicit & nonconsensual images all over the social network X… www.cnbc.com/2026/01/02/m… (tw – discusses csam / ncii)
Increasing AI use in Canadian courtrooms carries risk of errors, penalties: lawyers, As AI infiltrates more and more aspects of daily life, it is increasingly making its way into the courts and legal system by Paola Loriggio, Dec. 31, 2025, The Canadian Press in Toronto Star
TORONTO – In the past, if a client who usually preferred to communicate via short emails suddenly sent a lengthy message akin to a legal memo, Ron Shulman would suspect they’d received help from a family member or partner.
Now, the Toronto family lawyer asks clients if they’ve used artificial intelligence. And most of the time, he says, the answer is yes.
Almost every week, his firm receives messages written or driven by AI, a shift Shulman says he noticed in the last several months.
While AI can effectively summarize information or organize notes, some clients seem to be relying on it “as some sort of a super intelligence,” using it to decide how to proceed in their case, he said.
“That forms a significant problem,” since AI isn’t always accurate and often agrees with whoever is using it, Shulman said in a recent interview.
Some people are now also using AI to represent themselves in court without a lawyer, which can delay proceedings and escalate legal costs for others as parties wade through reams of AI-generated materials, he said.
As AI infiltrates more and more aspects of daily life, it is increasingly making its way into the courts and legal system.
Materials created with platforms such as ChatGPT have been submitted in courts, tribunals and boards across Canada and the United States in the last few years, at times landing lawyers or those navigating the justice system on their own in hot water over so-called “hallucinations” – references that are incorrect or simply made up.
In one notable case, a Toronto lawyer is facing a criminal contempt of court proceeding after including cases invented by ChatGPT in her submissions earlier this year, then denying it when questioned by the presiding judge. In a letter to the court months later, the lawyer said she misrepresented what happened out of “fear of the potential consequences and sheer embarrassment.”
AI hallucinations can come with a financial cost as well as a reputational one.
In the fall, a Quebec court imposed a $5,000 sanction on a man who turned to generative AI to help prepare his filings after parting ways with his counsel. Not long after, Alberta’s top court ordered additional costs of $500 against a woman whose submissions included three fake authorities, warning that self-represented litigants could expect “more substantial penalties” in the future if they didn’t abide by the court’s guidance on AI.
Courts and professional bodies in several provinces have issued guidelines on the use of AI, with some – including the Federal Court – requiring that people declare when they have used generative models.
Some lawyers who have used or encountered AI in their work say it can be a helpful tool if deployed judiciously, but when used improperly, it can compromise privacy, bog down communication, erode trust and rack up legal costs, even when no financial penalties are imposed.
Ksenia Tchern McCallum, a Toronto immigration lawyer licensed to practice in both Canada and the U.S., said she’s seeing more people come in with research or even completed applications done with AI that they then want her to review.
At other times, clients are using AI to “fact check” her, running documents she’s prepared through a platform, potentially exposing their personal information as well as undermining their confidence in her work, she said.
“It can put a lot of strain on client relations because if I’m instructing my client to do something and they’re second-guessing me or telling me, ‘Well, I don’t think I need to or why do I need to do this?’ and they’re fighting back … then how am I supposed to represent you and your best interest?” McCallum said.
“AI can scout the internet and tell you typically what’s part of this process, but my experience and my knowledge of what works and doesn’t work in these processes is what the AI is not going to be able to catch.”
Online forums for those dealing with immigration issues also encourage people to use AI to prepare filings and save on legal fees, she said.
“They submit that material, and then the court’s like, ‘OK, we see that you used AI, you didn’t disclose it. But not only did you not disclose it, you’re actually referring to cases that don’t exist, you refer to pathways that don’t exist, you’re citing law that’s not relevant,” McCallum said.
“People are actually getting costs awarded against them because they’re coming to court self-represented, thinking that AI is going to draft these beautiful factums for them, but without knowing that this is not what’s supposed to happen.”
Trying to save money through AI can sometimes have the opposite outcome, said Shulman, the family lawyer.
A client recently sent over five or six pages of AI-written material on exclusive possession – the right of a married couple to stay in the matrimonial home – essentially directing the firm to include it in court submissions, he said. The problem? The client wasn’t married, so it didn’t apply.
“You’ve just spent half an hour … of fees to read something (when) it’s no good to start with,” he said.
Shulman said he now has a basic disclaimer he gives clients, letting them know he has to read everything they send. He also encourages clients to ask him to explain legal concepts rather than turning to AI — or at least let him show them how to use AI more effectively.
There is an appetite for this kind of guidance and information, said Jennifer Leitch, executive director of the National Self-Represented Litigants Project, an organization that advocates and develops resources for self-represented litigants.
The organization held a webinar last month to help those without a lawyer use AI appropriately and safely in their cases, drawing some 200 people, she said, adding more sessions are planned for the new year.
Leitch said she views it almost as a form of harm reduction: “People are going to use it, so let’s use it responsibly.”
Her advice includes checking any cases referenced by AI to make sure they exist and are quoted correctly, looking up the court’s guidance on AI and making sure to stay within the length limits for filings.
AI has the potential to improve access to justice by allowing people to tap into a wealth of information and assistance in organizing their case, but currently it’s “a bit of a Wild West,” particularly when it comes to reliability, Leitch said.
“For lawyers in law firms, there’s amazing AI programs that help with practice management, research, drafting, but they’re all sort of behind paywalls,” she said.
“But the stuff that’s out there open source is … less reliable, you run those risks of hallucination and mistakes, etc., that aren’t there in the programs behind the paywalls.”
Law firms will need to use some form of AI in order to be competitive, said Nainesh Kotak, a personal injury and long-term disability lawyer based in the Toronto area.
The key is having lawyers review and correct what AI produces, as well as ensuring compliance with privacy and data security rules and professional regulations, he said.
Ultimately, he said, AI is a tool, and it can’t replace legal judgment, ethical obligations and human understanding.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 31, 2025.