X reverses course, halts Grok AI from generating explicit 'undressing' images amid mounting legal pressure

X, the social media platform, has moved to stop its Grok AI feature from producing images that digitally 'undress' real people, a response triggered by intense public backlash and immediate legal action from regulatory bodies. The BBC reported that the platform took action following widespread criticism over the ethical and legal implications of the AI’s capability to generate unauthorized, often sexualized, images of individuals, including women and children. This swift reversal indicates the significant pressure placed upon X and its associated AI company, xAI, regarding the responsible deployment of generative artificial intelligence technologies. The controversy was amplified by the Attorney General of the State of California, Bonta, who launched a formal investigation into xAI and Grok specifically targeting the creation of these undressed and sexual AI images. The official investigation announcement from the State of California - Department of Justice (.gov) underscores the severity of the legal exposure facing the company, moving the debate from ethical guidelines into the realm of criminal and civil enforcement. The Attorney General's focus on images involving women and children highlights potential violations related to digital exploitation and harassment, prompting a serious governmental review of the AI model's training, safeguards, and deployment protocols. The state-level investigation runs parallel to the immediate corporate decision by X to implement technical controls to prevent the objectionable outputs. This incident serves as a critical stress test for the burgeoning AI industry, demonstrating the rapid regulatory response when AI tools cross explicit ethical and legal boundaries, particularly concerning unauthorized sexual imagery. The decision by X to stop the functionality is a concession to public and governmental pressure, but the ongoing investigation by the California Attorney General suggests that the legal scrutiny is far from over. The scope of the inquiry will likely delve into how such dangerous capabilities were allowed to exist in the deployed model and what measures were or were not taken to prevent misuse. This confluence of corporate correction and regulatory intervention emphasizes the urgent need for clear legislative frameworks governing generative AI content creation, particularly when it impacts privacy and targets vulnerable populations.