Some recent posts on X involving Grok should concern anyone who believes technology should improve public life rather than degrade it. Over the past few weeks, several users discovered that images taken from public posts had been altered using Grok’s generative artificial intelligence, sexualised and then circulated on open online threads. Those affected were largely unaware this was happening and had no effective means to prevent it. The resulting harm was immediate, public and damaging.
After the government served the company a notice, X’s response was underwhelming. The platform said it would act against users who engaged in such behaviour, including through permanent bans. This misses the central issue. Action taken after altered images have already circulated does little to address the damage caused. Remedial steps are not a substitute for prevention.
More troubling is the absence of a clear explanation from X on how such misuse was possible in the first place. There has been no detailed technical account of what failed or what safeguards will be put in place to prevent a recurrence. The government is right to remain sceptical. Regulation is meant to limit harm before it spreads, not merely respond after the fact. Assigning responsibility solely to users is inadequate. Tools function within the limits set by their designers. When misuse is this easy, it points to insufficient safeguards rather than isolated bad behaviour. Platforms cannot promote products as disruptive, benefit from the attention they generate and then claim surprise when predictable misuse follows.
Indian law is unambiguous in this matter. Obscene or degrading content is unlawful regardless of whether it is produced by individuals or automated systems. Novelty does not confer exemption. Platform protections apply only when due diligence is exercised. Equally concerning is how quickly such practices became normalised. Initial outrage subsided, while circulation continued. This normalisation reflects a prioritisation of engagement over responsibility. India is not alone in raising concerns about excesses linked to Grok; regulators in other jurisdictions are also taking note. The message to X is straightforward: innovation without accountability is not progress. Respect for dignity, online or offline, is a basic requirement, not a discretionary choice.