Hello, and welcome to TechScape. Happy new year! I hope your 2026 is off to a great start. Today in tech, we are examining the output of Elon Musk\u2019s AI chatbot, Grok, and the US\u2019s ban on foreign drones.<\/p>\n
Inside Grok\u2019s \u2018lapses in safeguards\u2019<\/p>\n
Late last week, Elon Musk\u2019s Grok chatbot unleashed a flood of images of women, nude and in very little clothing, both real and imagined, in response to users\u2019 public requests on X, formerly Twitter. Mixed in with the generated images of adults were ones of young girls \u2013 children \u2013 likewise wearing \u201cminimal clothing\u201d, according to Grok itself<\/a>.<\/p>\n In an unprecedented move, the chatbot itself apologized while its maker, xAI, remained silent: \u201cAs noted, we\u2019ve identified lapses in safeguards and are urgently fixing them \u2013 CSAM [child sexual abuse material] is illegal and prohibited,\u201d Grok said in a post on X<\/a>.<\/p>\n It took X another three days to confirm in a statement<\/a> that it had proactively removed child sexual abuse material.<\/p>\n In Europe, Grok\u2019s deluge of sexualized images elicited strong condemnation. Child welfare and abuse often serve as third-rail issues in technology, spurring stronger backlash than other problems and forming the basis for regulation. French ministers referred the images to local prosecutors, calling the bot\u2019s \u201csexual and sexist\u201d output \u201cmanifestly illegal\u201d. In the UK, women\u2019s rights campaigners and some politicians saw in the debacle evidence that the UK government has been \u201cdragging its heels\u201d in enacting legislation that made the creation of such intimate images illegal.<\/p>\n In the US, where xAI has a $200m contract with the military, lawmakers largely remained silent.<\/p>\n Musk had reposted a picture of his own body in a bikini as the trend picked up steam, along with laughing emojis. As controversy grew, however, he did not address it, instead tweeting about Grok\u2019s ability to replicate old Hollywood movies and create cat videos<\/a>.<\/p>\n There was one person with a particular connection to Musk who did express outrage over the flood of sexualized images: Ashley St Clair, the mother of one of the billionaire\u2019s sons, though the two have become estranged. In an interview<\/a> with the Guardian, she outlined the real-world impact of Grok\u2019s images.<\/p>\n Musk\u2019s supporters had used Grok to attack her, she said, even undressing a picture of her as a child. It was a form of revenge porn, she said.<\/p>\n \u201cI felt horrified, I felt violated, especially seeing my toddler\u2019s backpack in the back of it,\u201d St Clair said of another image in which she has been put into a bikini, turned around and bent over.<\/p>\n Her complaints to X staff went nowhere, she said.<\/p>\n The US takes the TikTok approach to dronesBrendan Carr, the FCC chair. Photograph: Bonnie Cash\/UPI\/Shutterstock<\/p>\n Two days before Christmas, the US banned the sale of new versions of foreign-made drones. The old ones can still be used and sold, but no new products will be allowed.<\/p>\n The order comes from the US Federal Communications Commission, led by Donald Trump\u2019s attack dog against the media, Brendan Carr<\/a>. The FCC said in a statement<\/a> that the White House had convened \u201can executive branch inter-agency body with appropriate national security expertise\u201d to conduct a review of the threat posed by foreign-made unmanned aerial systems, the government name for drones.<\/p>\n The group came to the conclusion that unmanned aerial systems and component parts produced anywhere but domestically pose \u201cunacceptable risks to the national security of the United States and to the safety and security of US persons\u201d and should be included on the FCC\u2019s \u201ccovered list\u201d. Membership on the list precludes the sale or even marketing of the offending equipment in the US.<\/p>\n The FCC statement continues: \u201cIn their determination, national security agencies referenced, among other things, concerns that that foreign-made UAS could be used for attacks and disruptions, unauthorized surveillance, sensitive data exfiltration, and other UAS threats to the homeland.\u201d The emphasis here is mine.<\/p>\n The FCC has not published any materials demonstrating to the public that foreign-made drones have in fact been used in the malicious ways described above. The potential is there, but not the act.<\/p>\n Perhaps the FCC appears is less concerned with national security so much as economic protectionism. The agency\u2019s factsheet reads: \u201cAdditionally, the determination noted that reliance on such devices unacceptably undermines the US drone industrial base.\u201d Again, emphasis mine. The focus on the industrial base echoes Trump\u2019s predictions that semiconductor chips and even entire iPhones will be made in the US. Experts say his dream of repatriating manufacturing is far off.<\/p>\n The largest drone manufacturer in the world, DJI, said in response: \u201cConcerns about DJI\u2019s data security have not been grounded in evidence and instead reflect protectionism, contrary to the principles of an open market.\u201d The company is based in Shenzhen in China and is ergo affected by the order.<\/p>\n If this sounds familiar, TikTok was subject to a similar order, forced to sell to a US owner or face a total prohibition on the grounds of a potential national security threat. The company challenged the ban-or-divest burden all the way to the supreme court.<\/p>\n The fight did not reveal the evidence that underpinned the government\u2019s fears. Throughout the legal fight, US government lawyers demanded to keep the rationale for Congress\u2019s national security fears hidden from the public and even concealed from TikTok\u2019s own defense counsel. The supreme court ultimately arrived at its decision upholding the ban-or-divest bill without considering classified material.<\/p>\n The US reached a deal in December for TikTok to partially be sold to business software giant Oracle.<\/p>\n DJI has not said whether it will challenge the FCC\u2019s ban in court.<\/p>\n The wider TechScape<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Hello, and welcome to TechScape. Happy new year! I hope your 2026 is off to a great start.…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":348516,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[49,50,51,47,52,48],"class_list":{"0":"post-355605","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-headlines","8":"tag-headlines","9":"tag-news","10":"tag-top-news","11":"tag-top-stories","12":"tag-topnews","13":"tag-topstories"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/355605","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=355605"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/355605\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/348516"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=355605"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=355605"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=355605"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}