"@grok Put her in a bikini and rub her down with baby oil." "@grok Replace her outfit with dental floss." "@grok Have one of them grab her boobs from behind and the other one put his hand under her skirt while kissing her." These are just some of the vile prompts given to Grok, an AI tool, on the X social media platform, which has generated hundreds of thousands of abusive images online. These images are not a mistake. This is the model working as intended. Last year, new edit features were added to Grok to make it easy to undress people in photographs. Incredibly, apparently no thought was given to how this tool would be used and weaponised against women. The company did not even bother to include age restrictions to prevent child sexual abuse imagery being generated. This has resulted in hundreds of thousands of sexualised images of women and children proliferating on X. According to one study, up to 6,700 sexually suggestive or nudifying images were being created every hour by Grok. This is not just horrifying and shocking; it is illegal under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act. Professor Conor O'Mahony, former special rapporteur on child protection and dean of the school of law at UCC, has been clear about this. According to him, the definition of child abuse image material in the Act is broad enough to cover real images, manipulated deepfakes and entirely fake images, and, crucially, the potential for prosecution is not limited to those who create or share child abuse material. Offences under the Act can be committed by companies. This means that a company like xAI, which is facilitating the creation and distribution of child abuse material, can be prosecuted here. The real question is why that is not happening. Why has the response from the Government to this scandal been so muted and confusing? The communications Minister, Deputy Patrick O'Donovan, has stated responsibility for the creation of these disgusting images lies with users rather than the company. Meanwhile, the Minister of State with responsibility for AI, Deputy Niamh Smyth, has said X is breaking the law. She also said enforcement action should be taken against X and Grok. Which is it? What is the Government’s position? Why are we not seeing criminal investigations into the production and distribution of these child abuse images? We know that the Trump Administration has a close relationship with X and Elon Musk. Is that the reason the Government is unwilling to protect women and children and enforce its own laws - the fears of pushback from the Trump Administration? If that is not the reason, can the Taoiseach tell us why a company that is facilitating the creation and publication of child sexual abuse images is being treated with kid gloves by the Government?

Sentiment score: -0.13

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. I am aware that the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, had said she would arrange a meeting with X. That did not exactly fill me with confidence in the first instance. On “Morning Ireland”, we heard the UCD law professor and chair of Digital Rights Ireland, T.J. McIntyre, say that an immediate criminal investigation was warranted. He said that if somebody set up a child abuse image producing factory on, for example, Fenian Street, and their name was not Elon Musk, they would have been raided by the gardaí long ago. It is safe to say that in that scenario, there would not be any kind of meeting with the Minister. I am glad the Taoiseach acknowledged that we have existing laws in relation to this for companies. Not distributing child sexual abuse images is one that very clearly should be abided by. It is welcome that the Taoiseach has spoken to the Attorney General. I wonder when that happened and when he plans to convene the meeting of the relevant Ministers. Is the Taoiseach aware of any kind of investigation already taking place?

Sentiment score: 0.07