The Trump Venezuela Maduro Problem is Worse Than You Think
PDS Published 01/05/2026
-
Donald Trump attacked Venezuela, captured its leader, and now wants American companies to take back the oil he says was stolen from them.
But even if he’s finally being honest about what he’s really after, he’s still not telling the whole truth.
And what’s more, the way he’s talking? It feels like this could just be the start of a new era of American adventurism abroad.
Of course, we’ve been building to this moment for months.
The Pentagon amassed troops, aircraft, and warships in the Caribbean.
U.S. attacks killed at least 115 people on boats the administration claimed without providing evidence were transporting drugs.
And, at the end of last month, it actually carried out a drone strike on a port facility in Venezuela itself.
And, all the while, a CIA team reportedly spent months in the country, undetected, gathering intelligence about Maduro’s movements – including with the help of a source in Maduro’s government.
With that leading to 10:30pm last Friday when Trump reportedly gave final approval from Mar-a-Lago for a mission.
With more than 150 military aircraft – including drones, fighter planes and bombers – taking off from twenty different military bases and Navy ships.
And then, early Saturday morning, they struck at radar and air defense batteries across Caracas – clearing the way for helicopters that carried Delta Force Commandos right to Maduro’s doorstep.
And, about five minutes after entering the building, they reported that they had Maduro and his wife in custody.
And by 4:29am local time, the pair were transferred to the U.S.S. Iwo Jima – an American warship that had been stationed about 100 miles off the coast of Venezuela.
The whole operation reportedly took two hours and twenty minutes – and it killed at least forty people, including civilians and soldiers, according to an initial statement by a senior Venezuelan official.
Though, notably, the official Venezuelan count of the number of soldiers and civilians killed has since risen to eighty.[]
And as far as Maduro? He is now being held in New York City and plead not guilty today to federal charges including narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, and possession of machine guns and destructive devices.
Saying, “I am innocent, I am a decent man, I am President.”
With the updated and unsealed indictment alleging that he headed a “corrupt, illegitimate government that, for decades, has leveraged government power to protect and promote illegal activity, including drug trafficking.” ASSET []
The indictment also charges Maduro’s wife, his son, two other high-ranking Venezuelan officials, and an alleged leader of Tren de Aragua.
A gang that the Trump administration designated as a terrorist organization last year.
And that Trump has also claimed worked hand-in-hand with Maduro’s government – although, notably, U.S. intelligence agencies have said otherwise.
Right, there is reportedly evidence that Maduro has benefited from the drug trade to stay in power.
Including by using profits from drug trafficking to secure the loyalty of military officials and leaders in his party.
There’s little evidence, however, that Maduro or Venezuela had a role in the drug trade that directly contributed to overdose deaths in the U.S.
Right, fentanyl is almost entirely produced in Mexico using chemicals from China and Venezuela plays no known role in its trade.
And, in fact, Venezuela is not considered a major drug producer at all.
It has been a minor cocaine transit country, with most of the cocaine flowing through it heading to Europe, not the United States.
With the point being that this was never about drugs.
We always knew it and now even Trump is barely keeping up the charade.
Right, he’s made it very clear that his primary interest is oil:
“We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure and start making money for the country.” (6:33-6:51)
“We're gonna be taking out a tremendous amount of wealth out of the ground, and that wealth is going to the people of Venezuela and people from outside of Venezuela that used to be in Venezuela.” (54:10-54:20)
And with all that, you’ve had the likes of Democratic Senator Chris Murphy saying:
“The message they sent was that this wasn’t about regime change. They came to congress and they lied to our face. They said this is just a counter-narcotics operation.” (6:33-6:42)
“This seems to be mostly about oil and natural resources. DT’s entire foreign policy is corrupt. Russia, the middle east, now Venezuela, is all about making money for his friends. And wall street, they can make a lot of money off Venezuela if they run it. You saw within hours of the invasion the announcement of a group of Wall Street investors, energy industry investors planning a trip to Venezuela to make money off of this invasion, off of this ouster.” (1:01-1:32)
But that said, if there is an America-first play on all this, it’s that the U.S. is only taking back what rightfully belongs to it – with Trump having repeated a claim he’s made before that Venezuela stole America’s oil.
But, to be very clear, U.S. companies never owned oil or land in Venezuela and officials didn’t kick them out of the country.
With a Venezuelan economist at the University of Denver, explaining:
“Trump’s claim that Venezuela has stolen oil and land from the U.S. is baseless.”
But of course the claim does come from somewhere.
Going way back, a military dictator who ruled Venezuela from 1908 until 1935 granted concessions that left three foreign oil companies in control of 98 percent of the Venezuelan market. []
And the country became the world’s second-largest oil producer and largest exporter.
Then, in 1976, the Venezuelan government took control of the country’s petroleum industry – nationalizing hundreds of private businesses and foreign-owned assets, including projects operated by the American companies Exxon and Mobil.
And, overall, American oil companies lost roughly $5 billion in assets but were compensated just $1 billion each. []
Taking even greater losses in 2007 when President Hugo Chávez nationalized some of the last privately run oil operations in the country.
And major American companies, with the exception of Chevron, which is the only US oil company operating in Venezuela today, refused to accept the terms offered to them.
And, in that case, the companies later actually won billions of dollars from Venezuela in international arbitration – though the country hasn’t yet paid the full amounts.
And now the Trump administration has reportedly been telling oil execs in recent weeks that if they want compensation for seized property then gotta be ready to go back into Venezuela now and invest heavily.
And, of course, the potential upside is huge.
Venezuela is known to have the largest proven crude oil reserve in the world.
And notably, the country produces the kind of heavy crude oil that's needed for diesel fuel, asphalt and other fuels for heavy equipment.
But even with its massive reserves, it has been producing less than 1% of the world's crude oil supply – way less than a few decades ago – thanks to corruption, mismanagement, and US sanctions. []
And so there’s a lot of hesitancy to get involved.
With one industry official telling Politico “...the infrastructure currently there is so dilapidated that no one at these companies can adequately assess what is needed to make it operable.”[]
And another expert saying:
"The issue is not just that the infrastructure is in bad shape, but it's mostly about how do you get foreign companies to start pouring money in before they have a clear perspective on the political stability, the contract situation and the like.”
And on that note, we’re not really getting a whole lot of clarity from the White House.
Right, Trump said at a news conference after the attack that the U.S. would “run the country” until a “safe, proper and judicious transition” of power could be arranged.
He didn’t say whether U.S. forces would occupy the country but he did say he wasn’t afraid of “boots on the ground.”
But there are no signs of a continued U.S. military presence in Venezuela and Maduro’s government is still in power.
In fact, his vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, has been sworn in as interim president.
And she said in a national address on Saturday that the U.S. had invaded her country under false pretenses and insisted that Maduro is still Venezuela’s rightful leader.
But that may be more politics than a genuine display of loyalty.
U.S. officials reportedly actually settled Rodríguez as an acceptable candidate to replace Maduro weeks ago.
With Trump saying in the news conference that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had spoken to Rodriguez and determined “she’s essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great again.”
Also, notably, he said the country's exiled opposition leader, María Corina Machado, didn’t have the support or “respect” to lead the country.
Even though international observers say the candidate she supported after being disqualified beat Maduro in the 2024 election by a wide margin.
And in fact, with that, the Biden administration and the second Trump administration both recognized that candidate as the legitimate winner.
And since then Machado has openly supported the U.S. military campaign in the Caribbean and gone out of her way to appeal to Trump – calling him a “champion” of freedom, echoing his talking points on election fraud, and even dedicating her Nobel Peace Prize to him.
But all that may have been for nothing, especially as you’ve now had Rodríguez striking a more diplomatic tone, saying she was willing to work with Trump.
With this coming as you also had Trump warning her in an interview with The Atlantic that if Rodríguez, quote:
“...doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro.”
Trump also claimed again last night that the United States was “in charge” of Venezuela:
And when asked what he needed from Rodríguez, he replied:
“We need total access. We need access to the oil and to other things in their country that allow us to rebuild their country.”[]
But with that, Rubio has explained that the administration’s plan is to keep a military “quarantine” in place on the country’s oil exports – preventing oil tankers on a U.S. sanctions list from entering and leaving the country.
And the Venezuelan government would likely have to open up the state-controlled oil industry to foreign investment — likely giving priority to American companies – in order for the quarantine to end.
But it will take time to see how stable and how compliant the Venezuelan government will actually be, and if it will be enough to reassure U.S. companies.
And in the meantime, the ramifications of this could go beyond just Venezuela.
Right, you had Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, for example, making some points we’ve heard from a lot of people.
Saying that efforts by the U.S. to prove it is no longer a colonial power in the Americas has been “all thrown out” now.
Adding that Trump’s actions could “potentially turn the whole region against us”.
And also arguing that the administration’s aim of dominating the Western Hemisphere — including forcibly seizing leaders in the region — could spur China and Russia to try to do the same in their perceived “spheres of influence.”
Saying there’s “an extraordinarily high risk that adversaries around the world will use the same theory of the case to act with further impunity.”[]
And that’s especially the case as the administration seems to be suggesting Venezuela may only be the first country on this side of the globe he takes action against.
In fact, just in the couple of days following the operation in Venezuela, Team Trump has pointed to several countries as the possible next target - including Greenland, Columbia, and even Mexico.
Right, to start, Trump reignited his previous threats to annex Greenland.
Despite the pushback he received from Greenland and Denmark the first time he brought this up.
With Trump telling reporters on Air Force One on Sunday,
“It’s so strategic right now. Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place. We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and Denmark is not going to be able to do it.” []
“We'll worry about Greenland in about two months, let's talk about Greenland in 20 days." []
And he reiterated that to The Atlantic - saying that the US “absolutely” needs Greenland for national security.
Then there was this post on X made by Katie Miller - a former Trump administration aide who's married to top policy adviser, Stephen Miller.
With an American flag draped across a map of Greenland with the caption, “SOON.”
Between that post and Trump’s comments, leaders in Denmark or Greenland itself weren’t very happy. []
With Denmark Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen (Met-uh Fred-rick-sun) noting again that the US has, quote, “no right to annex” Greenland - whose people have made it very clear that it’s not for sale.
Not to mention that the US already has wide access to Greenland already because of a NATO defense agreement. []
So Trump’s “national security” argument doesn’t really hold water.
With Frederiksen adding,
“I would therefore strongly urge the United States to stop the threats against a historically close ally.” []
And Greenland’s Prime Minister echoed that sentiment and took it a step further - saying,
"When the president of the United States talks about 'we need Greenland' and connects us with Venezuela and military intervention, it's not just wrong. This is so disrespectful." []
And both Denmark and Germany have promised to defend Greenland against any invasion.
But it’s not just Greenland that Team Trump is eyeing as their next target.
There’s also Colombia - with Trump taking aim at the president Gustavo Petro.
Trump’s had beef with Petro for a while - placing sanctions on him, his family, and a member of his government back in October.
As well as slashing US assistance to Colombia after adding them to the list of countries that have failed to cooperate with the war on drugs.
And when asked if the US would carry out an operation on Colombia similar to what was done in Venezuela, Trump responded,
“It sounds good to me.” []
We should also talk about Cuba - with Trump telling reporters,
"I think Cuba is going to be something we'll end up talking about, because Cuba is a failing nation right now,"
Specifically, he said that Cuba’s economy - which has already been struggling thanks to a years-long embargo from the US - is only going to get worse now that Maduro is out of the picture.
Right, because Maduro provided Cuba with subsidized oil in exchange for Cuban security helping him maintain power. []
But he also noted to Fox News that he doesn’t think the US will need to take action in Cuba because, quote,
"I think it’s just going to fall … It’s going down for the count." []
But that didn’t stop Secretary of State Marco Rubio - whose parents fled from Cuba - from saying that the Cuban government should be, quote, "concerned, at least."[]
It’s also worth mentioning that Trump has threatened to take action in the Middle East as well.
Finally, there’s Mexico - with Trump telling Fox & Friends on Saturday morning, quote, “something's going to have to be done with Mexico."
Saying that Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum is allowing the drug cartels to run the country.
"She is very frightened of the cartels. They're running Mexico. I've asked her numerous times would you like us to take out the cartels. 'No, no, no, Mr. President, no, no, no, please.' So we have to do something." []
Now, most of these countries have denounced the operation in Venezuela and the abduction of Maduro.
With officials from Mexico, Cuba, and Colombia all arguing that Latin America and the Caribbean are peaceful and describing the US’s involvement with Venezuela as, quote, “cowardly, criminal and treacherous." []
And the opposition is even more prominent on the homefront - with many Democrats and Republicans in Congress outright condemning the operation.
With some, like Senator Tim Kaine, looking to force votes on preventing what Chuck Schumer called “a humanitarian and geopolitical disaster." []
So this is definitely something we’re going to have to keep our eyes on in the coming days and weeks.
In the meantime, I would love to know your thoughts about this entire situation in those comments down below.
Check out Odoo and try the full suite for free for 14 days here: Odoo
-
As the whole Venezuela fiasco was happening, we heard from one voice that’s gonna be prominent on the left over at least the next several years: Zohran Mamdani. [Ilmage]
Because the new mayor of New York City was officially sworn into office on Thursday, and it only took two days before he had his first public clash with Donald Trump as mayor. [B roll, 01:11:23]
With him personally calling up the president Saturday and, according to him … [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 34:39 - 35:02] Caption: “I called the president and spoke with him directly to register my opposition to this act and to make clear that it was an opposition based on being opposed to a pursuit of regime change, to the violation of federal and international law, and a desire to see that be consistent each and every day.”
But really his clash with the right, or rather the right’s clash with him, started the moment he was sworn in. [B roll, 01:10:46]
Because in his inauguration speech, he promised to govern “expansively and audaciously” as a “democratic socialist.” [Same B roll]
And there was one line in particular that really triggered conservatives. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 00:57 - 01:14] Caption: “We will draw this city closer together. We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism. If our campaign demonstrated that the people of New York yearned for solidarity, then let this government foster it.”
With many interpreting that “warmth of collectivism” bit as an open announcement that some form of Stalinism is about to be imposed on New York City. [Post, post, post, post, post]
But the mayor’s defenders were like, no no, the word you’re thinking of is “collectivization”; collectivism is a much more generic, vague philosophical disposition that privileges community over individuality.
And to the extent that Mamdani’s invocation of it contained any concrete political content, they argue it put him more in the tradition of folks like FDR and MLK, not Joseph Stalin.
With others speculating that he used the term on purpose to provoke a hysterical meltdown on the right, taking a cue from Trump’s political playbook. [Post]
Though if that was his intent, he didn’t need to say or do anything to get that reaction.
Right, apparently he just had to exist as a Muslim, because some people feared an imminent Islamic takeover.
With Republican Senator Tommy Tuberville [Toober-vill] proclaiming: “The enemy is inside the gates.” [Post]
And Trump advisor Laura Loomer totally lost her mind, posting:
“This is 100% an homage to Hamas and the Globalize the intifada movement. He is signaling the beginning of his Islamic conquest from a tunnel.” [Post]
In fact, it was “not only an homage to Hamas, but it’s also an homage to our first Muslim President who was also born in Africa: Barack Hussein Obama.” [Post]
Though to be clear, the “tunnel” Mamdani was inside when he got sworn in is a historic decommissioned subway station beneath City Hall that’s known for its gorgeous architecture. [Image]
With him telling Streetsblog NYC, “it was a physical monument to a city that dared to be both beautiful and build great things that would transform working peoples' lives.” [Quote]
But Loomer continued her fearmongering, boosting nonsense about an “Islamic Fifth Column” led by the Muslim Brotherhood that’s “executing a longterm plan to take control of Congress.” [Reply and original post]
With her reposting someone who said New York City’s a “good example of that” and adding: “It should be illegal for Muslims to hold office in America.” [Post]
But I think we all know that’s just noise; let’s get to what he’s actually done so far as mayor.
Starting with his executive orders, and here he faced a bit of a thorny trap.
Because Eric Adams signed a bunch of them on his way out, and on his first day Mamdani could either reaffirm them, revise them, or rescind them. [B roll]
So Mamdani went with option number three, though with one little caveat.
He rescinded every order Adams made after September 2024, the month the former mayor was indicted on federal corruption charges. [Image]
[Clip, 41:10 - 41:20] Caption: “It was a day at which many New Yorkers started to doubt even more than they did the motivations behind any executive order or executive action that was going to be taken.”
Now that did a number of things, such as eliminating the Office of Rodent Mitigation, deleting the crypto office, and removing federal immigration officials’ access to the Rikers Island jail complex. [Same B roll, then Image]
But the two orders that grabbed by far the most attention concerned Israel.
With one codifying a controversial definition of anti-Semitism proposed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, and the other banning city agencies from boycotting Israel. [Headline]
So Mamdani rescinded both of those, saying the IHRA’s definition conflates criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, and reaffirming his longstanding support for the BDS movement.
But that provoked a fair bit of blowback, with the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, and the United Jewish Appeal Federation of New York issuing a joint statement saying:
“Singling out Israel for sanctions is not the way to make Jewish New Yorkers feel included and safe, and will undermine any words to that effect.” [Quot]
As well as the Israeli Foreign Ministry adding: “On his very first day as @NYCMayor, Mamdani shows his true face. … This isn’t leadership. It’s antisemitic gasoline on an open fire.” [Post]
But the Mamdani camp predicted this kind of reaction, and they had a few different responses.
First of all, he was always clear that his intention was to rescind these orders; he didn’t “reveal” some hidden agenda on day one.
Second, he kept Adams’ order establishing the office to combat antisemitism, and he promised to increase funding for the Office for the Prevention of Hate Crimes.
And third, Adams clearly signed these orders last summer as a way of planting landmines that Mamdani would have no choice but to step on as soon as he entered office.
But now that that mess is out of the way, the new mayor’s leapt into his policy agenda, starting with housing.
And yesterday, he named the woman who will head his Department of Housing Preservation and Development: Dina Levy [Deena Leevee]. [Image]
She was once an assistant to the state attorney general, and just served as senior vice president at the state’s housing agency, where she oversaw development of single-family and manufactured homes and ran the state’s mortgage agency.
But to many New York City renters, she’s best known as a fearsome tenant rights activist.
In fact, the apartment complex where Mamdani announced her appointment was infamously neglected by its private landlord in 2008. [Quote, find “2008”]
But Levy helped organize its residents to secure a 5.6 million dollar loan from the same agency she’s about to lead and sell the building to new owners who renovated it. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 05:04 - 05:16] Caption: “Dina will no longer be petitioning HPD from the outside. She will now be leading it from the inside, delivering the kind of change that can transform lives.”
So now, she’ll be leading his effort to build 200,000 new affordable housing units over the next decade.
And to that end, Mamdani created one task force that’ll identify city-owned land for housing by July, and another that’ll identify and remove barriers like permitting that slow down building projects. [Quote, find “permitting”]
His administration will also hold so-called “rental ripoff hearings,” where tenants can come voice any and all housing-related grievances they have. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 06:30 - 06:37, 06:46 - 07:04, 07:11 - 07:19, 07:32 - 07:39] Caption: “We will hold these rental ripoff hearings across all five boroughs within the first 100 days of this administration. … I want these hearings to expose the ugly underbelly of our city, the rats that scurry through hallways, the children that shiver in their beds in the dead of winter because the heat is off, the fees imposed on pregnant mothers because of the fear that their babies may be too loud, … homes where you can peel flimsy tiles off the walls, homes where the pipes drip and rust, homes where roaches scuttle across the floor. … I want New Yorkers who have long been ignored by their landlords to finally be heard by our city government.”
And then, based on those hearings, his administration will draft a report to guide his housing policies.
Now as for his big campaign promises, he’s still planning to push for a rent freeze on nearly a million rent-stabilized apartments.
Though that may prove difficult, since Adams appointed new members to the rent guidelines board last year to hamstring Mamdani’s efforts.
But the new mayor insists he’ll be able to pressure them into action.
Next, he wants to make buses free, which would require support from state lawmakers and cost somewhere around 800 million dollars per year.
And finally, he wants to provide free universal childcare, and he promises that one way or another, all three of these policies will be in place by the time his first term ends.
But as ambitious as that is, everybody’s holding their breath — supporters and critics alike — to see whether he can actually defy gravity, or if he’ll inevitably fall back to Earth like past idealistic mayors have.
-
We need to dive into in just a minute.
But first, let me take a second to sponsor myself,
because right now, over a beautiful Bascombe,
we are restocked with our signature collection and revamped prints.
Right over the break.
We were working with our manufacturers not only to make sure that,
you know, the the shirts and the the hoodies, they were top notch,
but also that the prints on them were even better, really vibrant,
longer lasting, even when you don't follow the washing instructions like, I don't.
so right now you can snag our new thriving gear.
For me, it's a sarcastic wear.
along with our emotionally exhausted line.
God is testing me and I refuse to study a silly goose.
And this economy, and even more.
to celebrate the new year, our first week back.
If you use coupon code 2026 at checkout, you'll get 26% off.
All. Of course, at beautiful bastard.com.
-
A Paris court is handing out jail time to people who falsely claimed that France’s first lady is a man.
10 people were just found guilty of cyberbullying Brigitte Macron, with one landing a six-month jail sentence, several others getting suspended sentences up to eight months, and five were temporarily banned from using Twitter.
Everyone will also have to pay fines and attend online harassment courses, and just one defendant, who notably apologized, was spared from jail time.[]
And this all is tied to the big right-wing conspiracy that Brigitte was born a male.
The ten people convicted here spread that theory online, and also accused her of being a pedophile due to the 24-year age gap between her and President Emmanuel Macron.
Three were tried in absentia, but the seven who faced trial in person denied wrongdoing and insisted the posts were either satire or part of a legitimate debate. []
The court, however, called the comments “degrading, insulting, and malicious.”[]
Brigitte has repeatedly pushed back on these claims, and yesterday, she told French media that she launched these legal proceedings to set an example in fighting against online harassment.[]
And this is also not the only case where the Macrons are taking legal action.
Right, one of the reasons you are likely familiar with this conspiracy is because it has been amplified by Candace Owens, who is facing a defamation lawsuit from the Macrons.
That suit has not stopped Candace from continuing to make these claims though, and she responded by today’s news by calling Brigitte “dangerous,” suggesting she did “sinister stuff” in the military, and saying she:[]
“Wakes up everyday, puts on a fake wig, lipstick and mascara and declares war on those who know his true identity.”
So clearly, the sentences these people in France are facing are not necessarily going to make these theories go away.
With the New York Times saying that this case:
“was seen as a symptom of a toxic online culture in which growing numbers of internet users, driven by resentment of mainstream leaders and distrust in mainstream news media, are increasingly drawn to conspiracy theories and false information.”[]
And to some, it might seem kind of strange and random to accuse the French first lady of being trans.
But she is not the only person to deal with this, right, people have said this about Michelle Obama in the past, and plenty of other people in power, specifically women, often get “transvestigated.”
And it is no coincidence that this happens to women a lot, with a communications professor previously telling the independent news outlet The 19th that:[]
“Asserting that they’re literally disguising their true identity and they’re doing these things behind the scenes is a way of mapping fears and anxieties about broader gender issues in politics and society onto them personally.”
As for how the rest of this case will play out, at least one of those convicted plans on appealing the ruling, claiming that:
“This shows just how far French society is drifting toward less freedom of speech. Freedom of speech no longer exists."[]
But we will have to see how these allegations play out in U.S. courts with the Candace Owens lawsuit.
-
X has a new meta right now: asking Grok to take images of people and undress them… regardless of whether they consented or were even minors.
Go to almost any image -- especially of women -- and you’ll see replies like:
It didn’t matter if you were famous or not: requests were going to be made.
Such as what happened to the Swedish Deputy Prime Minister Ebba Busch after users asked Grok to make images of her in a bikini. []
(Which it did)[]
Or take Julie Yukari, a Brazilian musician who posted this image with her cat and her replies were flooded with people making lewd requests.[]
Yukari was not happy about it and her indignation was enough to actually make some waves, leading to X and Grok to take actions.
Notably, accounts that requested content had their posts deleted and Grok said:
That reply, which was made this morning, makes it seem like Grok won’t share or generate explicit content anymore.
However, posts from this morning show it’s still happening in at least some cases of both users requesting it for images of themselves and of others requesting it.[][]
Also bikinis and lingerie were just the tip of the iceberg -- with a lot of people trying to game the system by requesting things like covering the subject in clear tape in order to show more.
(I don’t think that ever worked as I never saw FULL nudity when doing this story.[]
Making lewd and sexual images of adults is bad enough, but the real concern came when it started involving children.
Obviously can’t and won’t show this, but actress Nell Fisher -- who plays Holly in the last season of Stranger Things -- was on the receiving end of this in particular.
Everything from lewd, sexual images to even creeps having Grok putting her on the laps for a kiss were being made.
Stuff like this drew a massive backlash, to which Elon Musk said:
And Musk’s response is unlikely to calm regulators, such as Ofcom in the UK which wrote this morning:
“We have made urgent contact with X and xAI to understand what steps they have taken to comply with their legal duties to protect users in the UK. Based on their response we will undertake a swift assessment to determine whether there are potential compliance issues that warrant investigations.” []
Legal repercussions or not, this situation has led many women to carefully consider what they post on the platform.
Some have taken down images of themselves doing innocent things like going to Disneyland.
Others are understandably leaving the platform outside of official announcements -- in which case they’re limiting their replies.[]
All that being said, not every AI generated image by Grok was unconsensual or crossed a sexual line.
In many cases, the people requesting the images were those depicted -- often as a form of promotion for OnlyFans.
In other cases people made silly or dumb requests, like when Musk had Grok add his face to this image…[]
Or dressing Busch in a Burqa since she was pushing a Burqa ban. []
For many this is a wakeup call that like it or not, this type of AI content is here and increasingly realistic.
So knowing people can generate with relative ease images of you doing or wearing just about anything, are you less likely to post stuff online?
Or do you view it as just another risk to being online?
