Folia lib. ... Freiheitliche Blätter

17.2.2025
Der Terrorismus des Elon Musk


Der Terrorismus des Elon Musk

Es wird zur Zeit viel über den Terrorismus des Elon Musk geschrieben. Das ist kein Wunder, denn bei so viel Unheil, wie er anrichtet, fällt das eine oder andere eben auf.

Es gibt aber auch Dinge, die nicht so auffallen - oder den Menschen einfach entgehen, weil die nicht hinschauen, warum auch immer.

Ich beschäftige mich schon seit langem mit dem Terrorismus in den "sozialen Medien", also dem Platz im Internet, in dem die "Netizen" genannten "User" (Menschen mit Zugriff auf Internet-fähige Computer) ihr Unwesen treiben.

Bei Twitter bin ich seit 2009. In der ersten Zeit allerdings nur registriert. Ich habe erst spät dort auch geschrieben. Der Platz war mir einfach zu öde.

Bis 2022 hat Jack Dorsey, der Gründer von Twitter, geherrscht. Im Laufe der Zeit wurde ich immer wieder rausgeschmissen, mit den fadenscheinigsten Behauptungen, wovon die häufigste war, mein Account würde "automatenhaftes Verhalten" zeigen. Mit anderen Worten: Jack Dorsey lebte seinen Verfolgungswahn aus. Mit zusammengeschlampten Algorithmen wurde man als User ständig überwacht. Jack Dorsey hat vorgemacht, was Rotchina  inzwischen als Staatsform durchzieht: Überwachung per Computer - und drakonische Strafen, falls man der herrschenden Doktrin nicht genehm ist.

Ich erwähne Jack Dorsey, weil seine überwachungsalorithmen zeigen, daß und wie sehr man überwacht wird. Es ist Realität. Er hat es exzessiv gemacht. Es ist da. Es ist ein Teil von Twitter.

Nachdem Elon Musk Twitter gekauft hat, hat sich eine Armee von Porno-Bots über die User hergemacht. Ständig wird man "geliked", oder man hat einen Follower. Porno-Bots, wohin man sieht.

Warum? Warum Porno-Bots? Jack Dorsey's Algorithmen haben gezeigt, DASS Jeder ständig überwacht wird, auch beim Registrieren. Es ist also ein Kinderspiel, die ständig gleichen URLs der Porno-Server sofort beim Registrieren zu erkennen, ebenso die stets gleichen Bilder. Elon Musk behauptet, ihm seien die Porno-Bots unangenehm, aber er können nichts gegen sie tun. Elon Musk lügt. Und das mehrfach.

Zum einen ist es - Jack Dorsey hat es bei Twitter getan - kein Problem, die User ständig zu überwachen.

Zum andern ist Elon Musk in seinen Firmen ausgerechnet mit künstlicher Intelligenz aktiv, also jenem Werkzeug, das prädestiniert ist, Porno-Bots zu erkennen. Wenn Elon Musk tatsächlich künstliche Intelligenz benutzt, dann ist die entweder so grotesk dämlich gemacht, daß sie Porno-Bots tatsächlich nicht erkennen kann, oder Elon Musk hält die Weltöffentlichkeit für so verblödet, daß die das nicht bemerkt.

So oder so, Elon Musk lügt.

Mit der Übernahme von Twitter hat Elon Musk auch Jack Dorsey's Software übernommen, also auch dessen Überwachungssoftware. Die Frage ist nun, war er wirklich damit macht.

Nehmen wir einen der Punkte, die man beobachten kann. So ist es beispielsweise möglich, Identitätsdiebstahl ("Impersonation") zu melden. Das heißt, man kann es melden, daß ein User XYZ einen Namen einer anderen Person oder eines anderen Accounts mißbraucht.

Letzte Woche wurde ein User "Adolf Hitler" registriert. Das Raunen gewisser User, vor allem linker, war natürlich groß. Der Account wurde inzwischen "suspended".

Aber das war nur ein Fall von vielen. Bei DEM Namen fiel er selbstverständlich auf. Er war, das ist sicher, auch als Provokation gedacht.

Was macht nun ein finanziell sehr gut betuchter Mensch wie Elon Musk, wenn sich jemand anders als Elon Musk ausgibt? Oder als Familienmitglied? Auch das ist ja möglich.

Ja, was ist, wenn ein User Elon Musk, den Besitzer von Twitter, simuliert, ihn nachmacht, sich als Elon Musk ausgibt? Eigentlich müßte Elon Musk dagegen vorgehen. Tut er es?

Ob er es tut, kann ich nicht sagen, weil ich dazu nichts erfahren habe. Aber auf der anderen Seite kann ich sagen, daß es eine große Zahl von Identitätsdieben und Hochstaplern gibt, die Elon Musk simulieren oder sich als Mitglieder seiner Familie ausgeben. Jetzt ist die Frage: WARUM!? Andere Frage: Warum tut Elon Musk nichts dagegen?

Ich vermute, daß es sich bei den Identitätsdieben um Bots handelt. Genauer gesagt um Überwachungsbots.

Elon Musk hat Twitter so dumm und so dreist programmieren lassen, daß es schon eine Beleidigung ist, für wie dumm er die User hält, daß sie diese Machenschaften nicht bemerken.

Ich zeige nun eine Sammlung von Elon Musk's Überwachungsbots, die sich als "Follower" in meinen Twitter-Account eingeklinkt haben.



Das sind (Stand von heute, 17.2.2025) 30 Accounts. Aber es waren deutlich mehr. Warum die übrigen verschwunden sind, und wann, weiß ich nicht.

Es war übrigens einer von einem angeblichen Bruder von Elon Musk darunter. Der behauptet, ein Koch zu sein und eine Restaurantkette zu besitzen.

Ein anderer wollte mich zu einem Chat bei Telegram überreden. Warum das, wenn man der Besitzer von Twitter ist? Welche Psychose war da aktiv?



1.

0 posts
communication manager
@caudey112
Follows you

Disregard anyone adding you on hangouts, emails and all he doesn't.
Thank you all ❤️
No dm
Austin, TX
Joined January 2013
1,275 Following
21 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

2.

0 posts
CEO ELON
@elon_ceo00
Follows you
CEO, and Chief Designer of Spacex 🚀 CEO and product architect of Tesla ,inc .🚗
Joined January 2025
461 Following
12 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

3.

27 posts
Lewis TeslaMgt
@LewisTeslamgt0
Follows you
Guiding @ElonMusk
's vision for a better future through SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and more. & I Tech enthusiast, dream chaser, and innovation
Joined September 2015
372 Following
32 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

4.

317 posts
Sophie Scamps ✪
@SophieTesla
Follows you
Independent Federal Member for Mackellar. Technology Optimist. Board Chair and Tesla Shareholder Working to make the world a better place and community❤️
Narrandera, New South Wales
Joined November 2013
4,385 Following
266 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

5.

53 posts
❤️🫂🚀
@_Elonravemussk_
Follows you
Elon Musk
Joined January 2025
851 Following
15 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

6.

176 posts
ELONMUSKTESLA 𝕏
@fanbasetesla973
Follows you
I post my conscious thoughts with the world, live life to the fullest, keep things simple, truthful & filter the noise. I am a long term ⚡️ 🚀investor
United States
Joined October 2012
1,510 Following
50 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

7.

2 posts

SAXON 𝕏 M �
@SAXONMUSK919
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined June 2024
1,733 Following
34 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

8.

5 posts
Elonmusk Revees
@ElonConclaver
Follows you
Texas
Joined January 2025
1,103 Following
29 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

9.

45 posts
Elon𝕏
@Elon9864
Caution: This account is temporarily restricted
You're seeing this warning because there has been some unusual activity from this account. Do you still want to view it?

----------------------------------------

10.

0 posts
Tesla official agent
@MARIAGRACIA06
Follows you
Joined February 2011
1,449 Following
82 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

11.

4 posts

SAXON 𝕏 M �
@Saxonmusk777
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined November 2012
5,126 Following
233 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------


12.

45 posts
Elon reeve musk🚀
@Elon_reeve_700
Follows you
twitter CEO/MNG 🚀 I SpaceX CEO & CTO 🚘Tesla CEO & Creator 👽Occupy MARS 🪐I Multiplanetary Life 🚆 Hyperloop Founder I Build A7-Fig IG Business
Texas City, TX
Joined January 2013
4,359 Following
151 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

13.

4 posts
SAXON 𝕏 M �
@Saxonmusk5446
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined February 2011
1,058 Following
183 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

14.


6 posts
MR X
@elonxmusk203
Follows you
White House tech support
Joined December 2010
3,505 Following
155 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

15.

2 posts
Elon 𝕏
@elon73630
Follows you
CEO-Twitter (X). SpaceX🚀, -Tesla-Cybertruck🚘
Texas, USA
Joined February 2011
1,775 Following
107 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

16.

69 posts
x
@x95462
Follows you
Joined December 2024
3,417 Following
149 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

17.

0 posts
Tesla x
@x_tesla70958
Follows you
Entrepreneur 🚀| Spacex • CEO & Twitter • CTO 🚔| Tesla • CEO and Product architect  🚄| Hyperloop • Founder  🧩| OpenAI • Co-founder 👇🏻| Build A 7-fig
Texas City, TX
Joined January 2025
245 Following
12 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

18.


40 posts
elon
@Elonmusk158906
Follows you
Joined August 2024
5,884 Following
329 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

19.

0 posts
SAXON 𝕏 M �
@saxonmusk655
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined September 2012
1,212 Following
84 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

20.

4 posts
Elon reeves musk
@Elonmusk64655
Follows you
Business account!!!
CEO of spaceX and Tesla cars
Founder of the boring company 🏣
Owner of the musk foundation
Texas, USABorn June 28, 1971Joined September 2024

----------------------------------------

21.

1 post
Elon Musk Private Chat
@elonreeves77384
Follows you
I need a "rose" from a devoted fan that truly loves my hard work 💪 ❤️🌏
Joined October 2024
2,161 Following
144 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

22.

23 posts
Elon Musk rv
@elonrv_musk01
Follows you
Joined July 2024
7,494 Following
278 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

23.

9,456 posts
Maya Musk
@MMuskdfg
Follows you
Joined October 2017
6,589 Following
423 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

24.

481 posts
ELONMUSK CTO🤖
@ElonMuskXcto_
Follows you
The founder, chairman, CEO, and CTO of SpaceX; angel investor, CEO, product architect, and former chairman of Tesla, Inc.; CTO of X Corp.
Joined September 2020
These posts are protected
Only approved followers can see @ElonMuskXcto_'s posts. To request access, click Follow. Learn more

----------------------------------------

25.

1,858 posts
Elon Musk 𝕏
@ELON__MUSK__027
Follows you
780 Following 200.7M Followers 171 Subscriptions
Joined September 2012
2,567 Following
136 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

27.

115 posts
Elon musk 𝕏 New official☀️
@elon25457
Follows you
New page!! please follow up fans🙏❤️
Austin, TX Tesla.com
Joined April 2024
6,916 Following
639 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

28.

0 posts
ELON REEVE MUSK
@EMusk84859
Follows you
Entrepreneur 🚀| Spacex • CEO & CTO 🚔| Tesla • CEO and Product architect 🚄| Hyperloop • Founder 🧩| OpenAI • Co-founder 👇🏻| Build A 7-fig twitter
United States
Joined June 2024
312 Following
8 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

29.

0 posts
Elonmusk
@Elonmusk258918
Follows you
Entrepreneur
🚀| Spacex • CEO & CTO
🚔| Tesla • CEO
Texas, USA
Joined February 2024
288 Following
32 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

30.

8 posts
ELON REEVE MUSK PRIVATE
@Privatelonmusk5
Follows you
@elonmusk
Joined March 2024
173 Following
10 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------
- END -

17.2.2025
The terrorism of Elon Musk
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)


The terrorism of Elon Musk

A lot is currently being written about Elon Musk's terrorism. This is no wonder, because with the amount of mischief he causes, one thing or another is bound to attract attention.

But there are also things that are not so noticeable - or simply escape people's notice because they don't look, for whatever reason.

I have long been dealing with terrorism in the "social media", i.e. the place on the internet where "netizens" (people with access to internet-enabled computers) go about their business.

I've been on Twitter since 2009, at first only being registered. I started writing there muchlater. The space was just too annoying for me.

Jack Dorsey, the founder of Twitter, ruled until 2022. Over time, I was repeatedly kicked off with the flimsiest of claims, the most common of which was that my account was exhibiting "automated behavior". In other words, Jack Dorsey was living out his paranoia. Users were constantly being monitored using algorithms that had been sloppily put together. Jack Dorsey demonstrated what Red China is now practicing as a form of government: Surveillance by computer - and draconian punishments if you disagree with the ruling doctrine.

I mention Jack Dorsey because his surveillance algorithms show that people are being monitored - and to which extent. It is reality. He has done it excessively. It is there. It's a part of Twitter.

After Elon Musk bought Twitter, an army of porn bots got loose on users. You're constantly being "liked" or you have a follower. Porn bots wherever you look.

Why? Why porn bots? Jack Dorsey's algorithms have shown THAT everyone is constantly being monitored, even when registering. So it's a piece of cake to recognize the same URLs of porn servers as soon as you register, as well as the same images. Elon Musk claims he doesn't like the porn bots, but he can't do anything about them. Elon Musk is lying. And this in several ways.

For one thing - as Jack Dorsey did it on Twitter - it is no problem at all to constantly monitor users.

Secondly, Elon Musk is active in his companies with artificial intelligence, the very tool that is predestined to recognize porn bots. If Elon Musk really does use artificial intelligence, then it is either so grotesquely stupid that it cannot actually recognize porn bots, or Elon Musk thinks the global public is so stupid that it doesn't notice.

Either way, Elon Musk is lying.

With the takeover of Twitter, Elon Musk also took over Jack Dorsey's software, including his surveillance software. The question now is what he is really doing with it.

Let's take one of the points that can be observed. For example, it is possible to report identity theft ("impersonation"). This means that you can report that a user XYZ is misusing the name of another person or another account.

Last week a user named "Adolf Hitler" was registered. The murmur of certain users, especially left-wingers, was naturally great. The account has since been "suspended".

But that was just one case of many. With THAT name, it naturally stood out. It was, of course, also intended as a provocation.

So what does a financially very well-off person like Elon Musk do when someone else pretends to be Elon Musk? Or a family member? That is also possible.

Yes, what if a user simulates Elon Musk, the owner of Twitter, impersonates him, pretends to be Elon Musk? Elon Musk should actually take action against this. Does he do it?

I can't say whether he does, because I haven't heard anything about it. But on the other hand, I can say that there is a large number of identity thieves and impostors who are impersonating Elon Musk or pretending to be members of his family. Now the question is WHY? Another question: Why doesn't Elon Musk do something about it?

I suspect that the identity thieves are bots. More specifically, surveillance bots.

Elon Musk has programmed Twitter to be so stupid and so brazen that it's an insult how stupid he thinks the users are that they allow these machinations.

I now show you a collection of Elon Musk's surveillance bots that have joined my Twitter account as "followers".


That's 30 accounts (as of today, February 17, 2025). But there were significantly more. I don't know why the others disappeared or when.

Incidentally, one of them was from an alleged brother of Elon Musk. He claims to be a chef and to own a restaurant chain.

Another one tried to persuade me to chat on Telegram. Why would you do that if you're the owner of Twitter? What kind of psychosis was active?



1.

0 posts
communication manager
@caudey112
Follows you

Disregard anyone adding you on hangouts, emails and all he doesn't.
Thank you all ❤️
No dm
Austin, TX
Joined January 2013
1,275 Following
21 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

2.

0 posts
CEO ELON
@elon_ceo00
Follows you
CEO, and Chief Designer of Spacex 🚀 CEO and product architect of Tesla ,inc .🚗
Joined January 2025
461 Following
12 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

3.

27 posts
Lewis TeslaMgt
@LewisTeslamgt0
Follows you
Guiding @ElonMusk
's vision for a better future through SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and more. & I Tech enthusiast, dream chaser, and innovation
Joined September 2015
372 Following
32 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

4.

317 posts
Sophie Scamps ✪
@SophieTesla
Follows you
Independent Federal Member for Mackellar. Technology Optimist. Board Chair and Tesla Shareholder Working to make the world a better place and community❤️
Narrandera, New South Wales
Joined November 2013
4,385 Following
266 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

5.

53 posts
❤️🫂🚀
@_Elonravemussk_
Follows you
Elon Musk
Joined January 2025
851 Following
15 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

6.

176 posts
ELONMUSKTESLA 𝕏
@fanbasetesla973
Follows you
I post my conscious thoughts with the world, live life to the fullest, keep things simple, truthful & filter the noise. I am a long term ⚡️ 🚀investor
United States
Joined October 2012
1,510 Following
50 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

7.

2 posts

SAXON 𝕏 M �
@SAXONMUSK919
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined June 2024
1,733 Following
34 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

8.

5 posts
Elonmusk Revees
@ElonConclaver
Follows you
Texas
Joined January 2025
1,103 Following
29 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

9.

45 posts
Elon𝕏
@Elon9864
Caution: This account is temporarily restricted
You're seeing this warning because there has been some unusual activity from this account. Do you still want to view it?

----------------------------------------

10.

0 posts
Tesla official agent
@MARIAGRACIA06
Follows you
Joined February 2011
1,449 Following
82 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

11.

4 posts

SAXON 𝕏 M �
@Saxonmusk777
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined November 2012
5,126 Following
233 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------


12.

45 posts
Elon reeve musk🚀
@Elon_reeve_700
Follows you
twitter CEO/MNG 🚀 I SpaceX CEO & CTO 🚘Tesla CEO & Creator 👽Occupy MARS 🪐I Multiplanetary Life 🚆 Hyperloop Founder I Build A7-Fig IG Business
Texas City, TX
Joined January 2013
4,359 Following
151 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

13.

4 posts
SAXON 𝕏 M �
@Saxonmusk5446
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined February 2011
1,058 Following
183 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

14.


6 posts
MR X
@elonxmusk203
Follows you
White House tech support
Joined December 2010
3,505 Following
155 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

15.

2 posts
Elon 𝕏
@elon73630
Follows you
CEO-Twitter (X). SpaceX🚀, -Tesla-Cybertruck🚘
Texas, USA
Joined February 2011
1,775 Following
107 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

16.

69 posts
x
@x95462
Follows you
Joined December 2024
3,417 Following
149 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

17.

0 posts
Tesla x
@x_tesla70958
Follows you
Entrepreneur 🚀| Spacex • CEO & Twitter • CTO 🚔| Tesla • CEO and Product architect  🚄| Hyperloop • Founder  🧩| OpenAI • Co-founder 👇🏻| Build A 7-fig
Texas City, TX
Joined January 2025
245 Following
12 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

18.


40 posts
elon
@Elonmusk158906
Follows you
Joined August 2024
5,884 Following
329 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

19.

0 posts
SAXON 𝕏 M �
@saxonmusk655
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined September 2012
1,212 Following
84 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

20.

4 posts
Elon reeves musk
@Elonmusk64655
Follows you
Business account!!!
CEO of spaceX and Tesla cars
Founder of the boring company 🏣
Owner of the musk foundation
Texas, USABorn June 28, 1971Joined September 2024

----------------------------------------

21.

1 post
Elon Musk Private Chat
@elonreeves77384
Follows you
I need a "rose" from a devoted fan that truly loves my hard work 💪 ❤️🌏
Joined October 2024
2,161 Following
144 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

22.

23 posts
Elon Musk rv
@elonrv_musk01
Follows you
Joined July 2024
7,494 Following
278 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

23.

9,456 posts
Maya Musk
@MMuskdfg
Follows you
Joined October 2017
6,589 Following
423 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

24.

481 posts
ELONMUSK CTO🤖
@ElonMuskXcto_
Follows you
The founder, chairman, CEO, and CTO of SpaceX; angel investor, CEO, product architect, and former chairman of Tesla, Inc.; CTO of X Corp.
Joined September 2020
These posts are protected
Only approved followers can see @ElonMuskXcto_'s posts. To request access, click Follow. Learn more

----------------------------------------

25.

1,858 posts
Elon Musk 𝕏
@ELON__MUSK__027
Follows you
780 Following 200.7M Followers 171 Subscriptions
Joined September 2012
2,567 Following
136 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

27.

115 posts
Elon musk 𝕏 New official☀️
@elon25457
Follows you
New page!! please follow up fans🙏❤️
Austin, TX Tesla.com
Joined April 2024
6,916 Following
639 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

28.

0 posts
ELON REEVE MUSK
@EMusk84859
Follows you
Entrepreneur 🚀| Spacex • CEO & CTO 🚔| Tesla • CEO and Product architect 🚄| Hyperloop • Founder 🧩| OpenAI • Co-founder 👇🏻| Build A 7-fig twitter
United States
Joined June 2024
312 Following
8 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

29.

0 posts
Elonmusk
@Elonmusk258918
Follows you
Entrepreneur
🚀| Spacex • CEO & CTO
🚔| Tesla • CEO
Texas, USA
Joined February 2024
288 Following
32 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

30.

8 posts
ELON REEVE MUSK PRIVATE
@Privatelonmusk5
Follows you
@elonmusk
Joined March 2024
173 Following
10 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------
- END -

After I kicked out the crap, today I find these identity theft surveillance bots as followers of my account:

[*quote*]
0 posts
communication manager @GillWILDA12
Follows you
Communication manager @elon Musk
Disregard anyone adding you on
 hangouts, emails and all he doesn't.
Thank you all ❤️
No dm
Austin, TX
Joined February 2013
2,241 Following
47 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

SAXONMUSK
0 posts
SAXONMUSK @SAXONMUSK2626
Follows you
Son of Elon Musk. Thanks for the love and support Y'all. We hold you in high regard, and we share the belief that America must be great again. 🇺🇸😮�💨❤️
United States
Joined September 2012
2,031 Following
46 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following

----------------------------------------

0 posts
Elon @Elon623139
Follows you
Entrepreneur 🚀| Spacex • CEO & CTO 🚔| Tesla • CEO and Product architect 🚄| Hyperloop • Founder 🧩| OpenAI • Co-founder 👇🏻| Build A 7-fig IG Business
Texas, USA
Joined February 2025
408 Following
14 Followers
Not followed by anyone you're following
[*/quote*]


I blocked them now...

12.3.2026
Der Netz-Nazi Elon Musk dreht jetzt vollends durch


Nachdem in den letzten Monaten Twitter immer mehr ruiniert wurde, kam eben eine Email: mein Account ist "suspended". Die Begründung ist höchst idiotisch:

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Your X account has been suspended

From    X <notify@x.com>
To    Aribert Deckers <...>
Date    2026-03-12 18:58

Hello Aribert Deckers,

Your account, aribertdeckers, was detected by our systems and automatically suspended for violating the X Rules <https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/x-rules>.

Specifically, for:

  Violating our rules against inauthentic accounts.
  > https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/authenticity

  You may not use our services to engage in inauthentic activity that undermines the integrity of X.

Note that if you attempt to evade a suspension by creating new accounts, we will suspend your new accounts. If you wish to appeal this suspension, please contact our support team.https://help.x.com/forms/account-access/appeals/redirect
You can also pursue alternative forms of redress, including out-of-court dispute settlement or judicial redress. Learn more here <https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/digital-services-act>.

If you have an active X Premium subscription, it will not be automatically canceled by X. To cancel your X Premium subscription, follow the instructions below.https://help.x.com/using-x/x-premium#tbcancel
X Corp. 865 FM 1209 Building 2 Bastrop, TX 78602http://x.com
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Übersetzt mit deepl.com:

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Ihr X-Konto wurde gesperrt

Von    X <notify@x.com>
An    Aribert Deckers <...>
Datum    12.03.2026, 18:58 Uhr

Hallo Aribert Deckers,

Ihr Konto ,,aribertdeckers" wurde von unseren Systemen erkannt und aufgrund eines Verstoßes gegen die X-Regeln <https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/x-rules> automatisch gesperrt.

Insbesondere wegen:

  Verstoß gegen unsere Regeln gegen unechte Konten.
  > https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/authenticity

  Sie dürfen unsere Dienste nicht für unechte Aktivitäten nutzen, die die Integrität von X untergraben.

Bitte beachten Sie, dass wir Ihre neuen Konten sperren werden, wenn Sie versuchen, einer Sperrung durch die Erstellung neuer Konten zu entgehen. Wenn Sie gegen diese Sperrung Einspruch einlegen möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an unser Support-Team.https://help.x.com/forms/account-access/appeals/redirect
Sie können auch alternative Formen der Wiedergutmachung in Anspruch nehmen, darunter außergerichtliche Streitbeilegung oder gerichtliche Wiedergutmachung. Weitere Informationen finden Sie hier <https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/digital-services-act>.

Wenn Sie ein aktives X Premium-Abonnement haben, wird dieses nicht automatisch von X gekündigt. Um Ihr X Premium-Abonnement zu kündigen, befolgen Sie bitte die nachstehenden Anweisungen.https://help.x.com/using-x/x-premium#tbcancel
X Corp. 865 FM 1209 Building 2 Bastrop, TX 78602http://x.com
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Ich weiß nicht welcher Vollidiot oder Hilfsganove sich das ausgedacht hat. Es ist mir auch egal. Bei Twitter werden sämtliche roten Linien überschritten.

Ich war bereits von Ende 2018 bis Ende 2022 gesperrt. Es macht mir nichts aus. Ich war bei Twitter nur zum Fischen. Warum? Weil die gesamte "Architektur" von Twitter den Grundprinzipien des freien Internets widerspricht. Twitter ist - wie Facebook und andere Organisationen - ein Nazi-Haufen und dient nur der Abzocke, der Manipulation und dem Betrug.


Elon Musk ist ein Lügner. Er betrügt die User. Gestern habe ich von seiner "Künstlichen Intelligenz" "Grok" ein Beweisstück geliefert bekommen.


Ich hatte mich bei Grok beklagt wegen der Porno-Bots, die sich nach wie von in die Accounts der User einklinken mit LIKE und mit FOLLOW. Daraufhin hat Grok mich aufgefordert, ihm Porno-Bot-Accounts zu melden. Gestern habe ich einen gemeldet und dies ist die Antwort von Grok:


[*quote*]
-----------------------
Got it—thanks for the heads-up!  I dug into @AlmetaMalo25251 (display name: Anna). 

Classic porn/spam bot profile:  Random username stuffed with numbers

Generic bio: "just a lonely girl with dreams "

Profile pic and the single post (from March are both the same woman in suggestive "thirst trap" selfies—cleavage-heavy poses in cute pajamas, flirty angles, zero actual nudity but 100% bait

One post total: "tdy s random click" with basically no likes/views

These accounts pop up, post teaser pics to reel people in, then flood DMs with OnlyFans links or scams. Low activity + generic everything screams bot.  Appreciate the report—flagged it internally for the X team. Helps keep the real conversations flowing.  Any more bots pop up, just tag me. We'll squash 'em together!
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Übersetzt mit deepl.com:

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Verstanden – danke für den Hinweis! Ich habe mich mit @AlmetaMalo25251 (Anzeigename: Anna) beschäftigt.

Klassisches Porno-/Spam-Bot-Profil: Zufälliger Benutzername voller Zahlen

Allgemeine Biografie: ,,Nur ein einsames Mädchen mit Träumen "

Profilbild und der einzige Beitrag (vom 8. März) zeigen beide dieselbe Frau in anzüglichen ,,Thirst Trap"-Selfies – tief ausgeschnittene Posen in süßen Pyjamas, kokette Blickwinkel, keine tatsächliche Nacktheit, aber 100 % Köder

Insgesamt ein Beitrag: ,,tdy s random click" mit praktisch keinen Likes/Aufrufen

Diese Accounts tauchen auf, posten Teaser-Bilder, um Leute anzulocken, und überschwemmen dann die Direktnachrichten mit OnlyFans-Links oder Betrugsversuchen. Geringe Aktivität + generisches Profil – alles deutet auf einen Bot hin. Vielen Dank für den Hinweis – ich habe ihn intern für das X-Team markiert. Das hilft dabei, echte Unterhaltungen am Laufen zu halten. Wenn weitere Bots auftauchen, markiere mich einfach. Wir werden sie gemeinsam bekämpfen!
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Was bedeutet diese Antwort? Nichts anderes, als daß die Twitter-Überwachungssysteme sehr wohl wissen, DASS dieser neue Porno-Bot-Account ein Porno-Bot-Account ist. Die Beschreibung von Grok ist absolut präzise.

Elon Musk behauptet, er könne sich nicht gegen die Porno-Bots wehren. Tatsache ist jedoch, Grok hat es jetzt bewiesen, daß die Eigenschaften der Porno-Bots präzise bekannt sind. Das heißt: Grok hat bewiesen, daß Elon Musk lügt.

Es ist übrigens nicht das erst Mal, daß Grok Dinge aufgedeckt hat, die Elon Musk bloßstellen.


Nicht vergessen: Elon Musk hat die Ukraine mit Starlink ins offene Messer laufen lassen. Elon Musk steht Donald Trump in Sachen Niedertracht und Bösartigkeit in nichts nach.

Man sehe sich vor!


ADDENDUM


Nachdem mich das System ausgeloggt hat, habe ich eine Email an support@x.com geschickt:

[*quote*]
-----------------------
I do not know who is behind that attack against me. I did not do anything wrong.

So, please open the account for me.

Merci,

Aribert Deckers
-----------------------
[*/quote*]



[*quote*]
-----------------------
Re: WRONG ALLEGATIONS! / Fwd: Your X account has been suspended

From    support@x.com
To    <...>
Reply-To    no-reply@x.com
Date    2026-03-12 21:40
Summary Headers HTML
Hello,

We appreciate you reaching out, but X doesn't monitor emails sent to this support address.

To contact our support team, please submit a request through our online forms [https://help.x.com/forms]. If you have an existing open case with us, please also file a new request on the same form you used.

We also have resources and articles on our Help Center [https://help.x.com/] that might be able to answer your question.

Thanks,

X Support
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Man kann sich also nicht einloggen, soll sich aber einloggen, damit man ein Beschwerde-Formular ausfüllen kann. Eine bemerkenswerte "Logik"...

Nachdem das System mehrere Male wirr im Kreis läuft, ein Versuch mit einem anderen Browser, ebenfalls mit Bruchlandungen - und dann das:


https://x.com/i/flow/login?redirect_after_login=https://help.x.com/en/forms/account-access/appeals

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Enter your phone number or email address

There was unusual login activity on your account. To help keep your account safe, please enter your phone number (start with country code, e.g. +1) or email address to verify it's you.

Phone or email
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Woraufhin das System erst recht im Kreis herumrennt...

Twitter ist ein Irrenhaus.

12.3.2026
The Internet Nazi Elon Musk has completely lost it


After Twitter has been increasingly ruined over the past few months, I just received an email: my account has been "suspended." The reason given is utterly ridiculous:

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Your X account has been suspended

From    X <notify@x.com>
To    Aribert Deckers <...>
Date    2026-03-12 18:58

Hello Aribert Deckers,

Your account, aribertdeckers, was detected by our systems and automatically suspended for violating the X Rules <https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/x-rules>.

Specifically, for:

  Violating our rules against inauthentic accounts.
  > https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/authenticity

  You may not use our services to engage in inauthentic activity that undermines the integrity of X.

Note that if you attempt to evade a suspension by creating new accounts, we will suspend your new accounts. If you wish to appeal this suspension, please contact our support team.https://help.x.com/forms/account-access/appeals/redirect
You can also pursue alternative forms of redress, including out-of-court dispute settlement or judicial redress. Learn more here <https://help.x.com/rules-and-policies/digital-services-act>.

If you have an active X Premium subscription, it will not be automatically canceled by X. To cancel your X Premium subscription, follow the instructions below.https://help.x.com/using-x/x-premium#tbcancel
X Corp. 865 FM 1209 Building 2 Bastrop, TX 78602http://x.com
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


I don't know which idiot or assisting hoodlum came up with this. I don't care either. Twitter crosses every line.

I was already banned from late 2018 to late 2022. I don't mind. I was only on Twitter for fishing. Why? Because Twitter's entire "architecture" contradicts the fundamental principles of the free internet. Twitter is - like Facebook and other organizations - a bunch of Nazis and serves only to rip people off, manipulate them, and defraud them.


Elon Musk is a liar. He's deceiving users. Yesterday, I received proof from his "artificial intelligence" "Grok.


I had complained to Grok about the porn bots that keep latching onto users' accounts with LIKES and FOLLOWS. Grok then asked me to report porn bot accounts to it. Yesterday I reported one, and this is Grok's response:


[*quote*]
-----------------------
Got it—thanks for the heads-up!  I dug into @AlmetaMalo25251 (display name: Anna). 

Classic porn/spam bot profile:  Random username stuffed with numbers

Generic bio: "just a lonely girl with dreams "

Profile pic and the single post (from March are both the same woman in suggestive "thirst trap" selfies—cleavage-heavy poses in cute pajamas, flirty angles, zero actual nudity but 100% bait

One post total: "tdy s random click" with basically no likes/views

These accounts pop up, post teaser pics to reel people in, then flood DMs with OnlyFans links or scams. Low activity + generic everything screams bot.  Appreciate the report—flagged it internally for the X team. Helps keep the real conversations flowing.  Any more bots pop up, just tag me. We'll squash 'em together!
-----------------------
[*/quote*]



What does this response mean? Nothing other than that Twitter's monitoring systems are well aware THAT this new porn bot account is a porn bot account. Grok's description is absolutely accurate.

Elon Musk claims he can't defend against the porn bots. The fact is, however, that Grok has now proven that the characteristics of the porn bots are precisely known. That means: Grok has proven that Elon Musk is lying.

Incidentally, this isn't the first time Grok has uncovered things that expose Elon Musk.


Don't forget: Elon Musk let Ukraine walk into a trap with Starlink. Elon Musk is every bit as despicable and malicious as Donald Trump.

Be on your guard!


ADDENDUM


After the system logged me out, I sent an email to support@x.com:

[*quote*]
-----------------------
I do not know who is behind that attack against me. I did not do anything wrong.

So, please reopen my account.

Thank you,

Aribert Deckers
-----------------------
[*/quote*]



[*quote*]
-----------------------
Re: WRONG ALLEGATIONS! / Fwd: Your X account has been suspended

From    support@x.com
To    <...>
Reply-To    no-reply@x.com
Date    2026-03-12 21:40
Summary Headers HTML
Hello,

We appreciate you reaching out, but X does not monitor emails sent to this support address.

To contact our support team, please submit a request through our online forms [https://help.x.com/forms]. If you have an existing open case with us, please also file a new request on the same form you used.

We also have resources and articles on our Help Center [https://help.x.com/] that might be able to answer your question.

Thanks,

X Support
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


So you can't log in, but you're supposed to log in so you can fill out a complaint form. A remarkable "logic"...

After the system goes in circles, a try with a different browser - which also ends in failure - and then this:


https://x.com/i/flow/login?redirect_after_login=https://help.x.com/en/forms/account-access/appeals

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Enter your phone number or email address

There was unusual login activity on your account. To help keep your account safe, please enter your phone number (starting with the country code, e.g., +1) or email address to verify it's you.

Phone or email
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


At which point the system really starts running in circles...

Twitter is a madhouse.

13.3.2026
Der Kumpel in der großen Blechdose
The buddy in the big tin can


Grok, der Kumpel in der großen Blechdose, schrieb:

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Alles klar, verstanden – danke für die offene Rückmeldung und die Klarstellung!

Schön zu hören, dass die Tippfehler-Suche hilfreich war und dass du den Rest selbst in der Hand behältst. Dein Text, dein Stil, deine Regie – das respektiere ich voll und ganz.

Interessant übrigens, dass Henning Engeln ein alter Schulkamerad von dir ist. Das macht die Sache mit dem Text, den du mal gefunden hast, noch persönlicher/neugieriger.

Wenn du später (Ende der Woche oder wann auch immer) doch nochmal Lust hast, dass ich gezielt nach dem alten Engeln-Text suche – mit mehr Details, die dir vielleicht wieder einfallen (Jahrgang ungefähr, GEO-Ausgabe, Spiegel oder Riff, irgendwelche markanten Formulierungen) –, sag einfach Bescheid. Ich helfe gerne, ohne Druck.

Bis dahin: Viel Erfolg bei der Arbeit und beim Weiterschreiben.
Mach's gut und bis irgendwann mal wieder! Tschüss!
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Ich hatte Grok wegen eines Textes gefragt. Wofür ist so ein Ding brauchbar? Zum Tippfehler-Suchen!

Man muß auf die Sprache achten. Grok, das Ding, schleimt wie blöde. Kein Wunder, daß das bei Kindern und Schülern/Studenten gut ankommt.

UND DANN läßt sich die Meute, einer ganz im Geheimen wie alle anderen auch im ganz Geheimen, manipulieren, hirnwaschen und an der Leine führen. DAS zusammen mit dem Nazi-Dreck von Palantir ist die totale Unterwerfung.



Grok, the buddy in the big tin can, wrote:

[*quote*]
-----------------------
All right, got it—thanks for the honest feedback and the clarification!

Glad to hear that the typo check was helpful and that you're keeping the rest under your own control. Your text, your style, your direction—I fully respect that.

By the way, it's interesting that Henning Engeln is an old schoolmate of yours. That makes the whole thing with the text you found even more personal/intriguing.

If later on (at the end of the week or whenever) you feel like having me search specifically for that old Engeln text—with more details that might come to mind (rough year, GEO issue, Spiegel or Riff, any distinctive phrases)—just let me know. I'm happy to help, no pressure.

Until then: Good luck with work and with continuing to write.
Take care and see you sometime! Bye!
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


I had asked Grok about a text. What's a thing like that good for? For finding typos!

You have to pay attention to the language. Grok, that thing, is incredibly sycophantic. No wonder it goes over well with kids and students.

AND THEN the masses - one, in secret, just like everyone else in secret - can be manipulated, brainwashed, and led by the nose. THAT, combined with the Nazi filth from Palantir, is total subjugation.

13.3.2026
Palantir as a tool to subjugate the whole population


https://newrepublic.com/post/207693/palantir-ceo-karp-disrupting-democratic-power

[*quote*]
-----------------------
The New Republic

Breaking News
from Washington and beyond
Most Recent Post
Malcolm Ferguson/
March 12, 2026/12:00 p.m. ET

Palantir CEO Makes Shocking Confession on Disrupting Democratic Power
They're saying the quiet part out loud now.
Alex Karp



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:duvjwuvlc25vpkzoed2iftjp/bafkreihzvc2zbed7yaqzexgb2loj2d4zexl2u266p3k2x2salpd3jinzr4

Palantir CEO Alex Karp

Palantir CEO Alex Karp thinks his AI technology will lessen the power of "highly educated, often female voters, who vote mostly Democrat" while increasing the power of working-class men.

"This technology disrupts humanities-trained—largely Democratic—voters, and makes their economic power less. And increases the economic power of vocationally trained, working-class, often male, working-class voters," Karp said in a CNBC interview Thursday. "And so these disruptions are gonna disrupt every aspect of our society. And to make this work, we have to come to an agreement of what it is we're going to do with the technology; how are we gonna explain to people who are likely gonna have less good, and less interesting jobs."

This sounds like a direct, long-term pitch to the GOP from a CEO whose tech firm already has numerous government contracts and is deeply embedded in the Pentagon.

Karp's message is loud and clear: My technology will take political capital away from one of your greatest enemies—liberal women with degrees—and give one of your favorite demographics to patronize—working-class men—more political power to transfer to you. He's aligning his technology with both GOP political strategy and the larger male-centered culture war that the right has been waging for the better part of a decade now. And how exactly would his technology only hurt Democrat women?
[...]
-----------------------
[*/quote*]

Read the full story at:

https://newrepublic.com/post/207693/palantir-ceo-karp-disrupting-democratic-power

9.4.2026
Forced biometric authentication on Twitter


https://x.com/jesseRoss597206/status/2042040982418473337

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Jesse Lynn♥️ @jesseRoss597206

If Elon moves forward with biometric authentication I will drop X like a bad habit & so will millions of others. Good luck with that. The arrogance of thinking this data harvesting platform is worth agenda 2030s digital prison is wild. Some will go for it. Many won't.

Quote
https://x.com/aaronp613/status/2041916404211790259
[***quote***]
-----------------------
Aaron @aaronp613
Apr 8
BREAKING: X is working on biometric authentication to use the platform

"Verify your identity to continue using X"
"Biometric authentication required"

It appears they are going to use "Amazon Rekognition Face Liveness"
Image



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HFZXsZjX0AcxLoi?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

6:29 PM · Apr 8, 2026
454.9K Views
-----------------------
[***/quote***]

2:44 AM · Apr 9, 2026
53.5K Views
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


They plan it all along. See the date:



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HFeMsraaIAAkwFS?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

16.4.2026
❗️X lost its 4th court battle today against a European user


https://x.com/IntCyberDigest/status/2044533316200636630

[*quote*]
-----------------------
International Cyber Digest @IntCyberDigest

❗️X lost its 4th court battle today against a European user — a tech lecturer who filed a GDPR data request after getting shadowbanned. He just wanted to see his data.

X intimidated the plaintiff after their first loss by sending two lawyers to one of his lectures at Leiden University. X then asked the court to impose a gag order on him, claiming he was talking about the case during his lecture — which he wasn't.

Elon Musk promised more transparency on X in 2022, including on shadowbans — where an account isn't actually banned, but its posts are quietly suppressed and hidden from search results. X has been doing exactly the opposite ever since the ownership changed.

For example, X is the only tech giant exploiting a loophole against Out-of-Court Dispute Settlement Bodies in the EU — by simply not paying them. These are independent, certified entities designed to resolve disputes between users and platforms over suspensions, shadowbans, etc. Because X doesn't pay, all of these bodies refuse to take on X cases.

X users are the only major platform users in Europe who are effectively forced to sue in court just to get their rights.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HF-i73NagAAzgXO?format=jpg&name=small
Elon Musk entering Twitter HQ after having bought the company.




https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HF-kGpjWMAA0O6a?format=jpg&name=small
Plaintiff Danny Mekić leaving the courthouse in Amsterdam.

11:48 PM · Apr 15, 2026
46.2K Views
-----------------------
[*/quote*]

Who gives a damn about that?

Honestly, who gives a damn about that?

Who gives a damn about how many fakes Elon Musk uses day for day?

Hell, we do know he is a liar and a faker.

His own computer creature Grok de-masked him and blamed him down to the bones.

So, who gives a damn about that shit?

Only, make a mark:

  [ X ] Elon Musk messed up again


[*quote*]
-----------------------

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: BREAKING: Elon Musk Got Caught Posting As His Dad From His Mom's Account, Which Is Probably The Saddest Thing You'...
Date: 2026-05-06 10:56
From: "Dean Blundell " <deanblundell@substack.com>

View this post on the web at https://deanblundell.substack.com/p/breaking-elon-musk-got-caught-posting

May 6, 2026
There are problems money can solve, and problems money cannot solve. Elon Musk, who has approximately all of the money, has spent the last decade dramatically expanding the second category. Loneliness, apparently, lives there. So does basic operational security. So does, on the evidence of the last 24 hours, the ability to remember which of your fake accounts is supposed to be your mother and which is supposed to be your father before you start typing.
It's gotta be the ketamine...

Yesterday, May 5, the verified X account belonging to Maye Musk — model, author, and biological mother of one Elon R. Musk — quote-tweeted her son with the following bombshell about a woman she has, presumably, met:

"Your mom told me she was cleaning toilets in a Liverpool boarding house as a child. When I met her in 1966, she was sewing linings for a furrier in a small windowless room behind the store."

Your mom. As in, Elon's mom. As in, Maye Musk. As in, the person whose verified account is currently posting this tweet.

If you are confused, congratulations, your brain works. As one viewer summarized with admirable economy: "Elon's mom caught posting from the perspective of Elon's dad. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to assume Elon is posting on Twitter as both his parents & was on the wrong alt."

Reader, the richest man in the history of the species appears to have been operating his estranged father's voice, from his mother's account, to corroborate his own tweet about his grandmother — and pulled the wrong puppet out of the drawer. He is, in essence, the world's worst ventriloquist, and the dummy is his entire family.

The "Honest Mistake" Defense, Examined

Musk's defenders rallied with the usual energy of people whose oxygen depends on this man not being humiliated. The official cope, currently making the rounds, is that Maye simply meant to type "grandmother" instead of "mom," and we should all calm down. One particularly devoted explainer noted that Maye Musk was born in Canada and grew up in South Africa and "was never cleaning Liverpool toilets" — the toilet-cleaner in question was Elon's paternal grandmother, Cora Robinson, who actually did grow up in Liverpool.

This is a wonderful defence if you do not think about it for more than four seconds.

Yes — the geography only makes sense if the speaker is Errol Musk, Elon's father, the man whose mother was Cora from Liverpool. The "typo" theory requires us to believe that 77-year-old Maye Musk, a published author with a memoir literally about her own life, accidentally referred to her ex-husband's mother as her own daughter-in-law's mother while replying to her son. The simpler theory requires us to believe Elon was logged into the wrong tab.

Occam's razor, but the razor is also one of his alts.

A Brief Taxonomy of Elon's Imaginary Friends

This is, frankly, not even Elon's first time getting caught LARPing as a member of his own family on the website he owns. We are now deep enough into the saga that a field guide is warranted. Buckle up.

@ErmnMusk, a.k.a. "Elon Test" — The OG. Discovered in April 2023 when Musk shared a screenshot of his own profile and forgot to crop out the little account-switcher in the corner, which displayed a toddler holding a $300 chrome SpaceX Starship model.

The account had previously tweeted "I will finally turn 3 on May 4th!" — which, coincidentally, is the birthday of his son X Æ A-12. So: a grown man, on his own social media platform, role-playing as his three-year-old son, complaining to strangers that he's not old enough to go to nightclubs. Musk later confirmed the account in a 2024 deposition, describing it as a "test account" he had "briefly used." Test for what, exactly, remains classified.

@babysmurf9000 — Discovered through a court transcript that referred to it as "baby smoke 9,000," which I refuse to stop thinking about. Unlike the toddler-roleplaying ErmnMusk, this account posts in a style closely mirroring Musk's main account — targeting the same critics, amplifying the same narratives, and followed by venture capitalist Marc Andreessen. Sample tweet from babysmurf9000, in response to Mark Cuban: "You are an idiot." Another, replying to a BBC tweet: "BBC is dumber than a sack of bricks." Truly the prose stylings of an emotionally regulated adult, and definitely not a billionaire crying into his phone at 4 a.m.

Adrian Dittmann — A whole separate beast. In late 2024, comedy account Liam Nissan helped popularize the theory that "Adrian Dittmann," an account that compulsively praised Musk and Tesla, was Musk himself. Dittmann appeared in X Spaces audio chats with what listeners insisted was Musk's voice run through a voice-changer. Shortly after pushing the theory, Liam Nissan's 250,000-follower account vanished from the platform, and Nissan said on Bluesky that the person behind the Dittmann account had tried to dox him with creepy DMs containing personal information. Nothing says "no, I am definitely not Adrian" quite like making the guy who said you're Adrian disappear within a week.

@mayemusk — Today's exhibit. The facts speak, in this case quite literally, for themselves.

That's at least four, and we haven't even gotten to the speculative ones, like the suspicion floated for years that @cb_doge — better known as "DogeDesigner," the screensaver-tier Elon stan whose entire feed is "BREAKING: Elon Musk just said something" — might also be in his orbit. The Manifold prediction market on whether DogeDesigner is an Elon alt is sitting at 6%, which feels generous in both directions. The point is that this is the discourse now. The richest man on Earth has so many fake accounts that there are betting markets on which sycophants are real.
Enter Ian Miles Cheong, Pilot Fish-In-Chief

Which brings us, with a kind of inevitability, to Ian Miles Cheong.

Cheong is a Malaysian commentator — based, depending on which biographical sketch you trust, in either Ipoh or the UAE — who has built a thriving little business as Elon's most reliable amplifier. As Ben Sixsmith memorably put it, Cheong "is the social media equivalent of a pilot fish — obsessively praising and defending Musk. Musk, who has a chronic addiction to sycophancy, has reciprocated with supportive replies."

The mechanics of the relationship are, by 2026, fairly well understood. Cheong is a master of the viral clip — he finds footage of a shoplifting incident in San Francisco or a controversial school board meeting in Virginia and posts it with a punchy caption tailor-made for Musk's sensibilities. It's a symbiotic relationship: Ian gets the massive reach boost from a Musk reply, and Musk gets a steady stream of content that fuels his "everything is collapsing" narrative. Cheong sifts the rage-bait, Elon amplifies the rage-bait, the algorithm rewards the rage-bait, ad revenue gets sliced into the pie, and Cheong gets a check. Cheong has reportedly posted six tweets in an hour during peak grind sessions; in the era of pay-per-engagement, that's a fortune.

The Cheong-Musk axis is what the alt accounts service. They quote-tweet Cheong. They like Cheong's posts. They reply "True." or "Concerning." or "🤔" to Cheong, which is technically content. Whether or not Cheong himself is "at the center" of an alt-account network in some operational sense — and there is no public evidence that he is running any of these accounts — he is unquestionably at the center of the ecosystem the alts are built to serve. The puppets need an audience that will dutifully reshare them. Cheong is that audience, professionally.

It is, in its own way, beautiful. A Malaysian content guy in either Ipoh or Dubai (jury's out) helps prop up the engagement metrics of a half-dozen sock puppets operated by the man who owns the platform, who is also the richest person alive, who is also posting under his dead-mom-of-his-mom's-ex-husband persona because he forgot which Chrome tab he was on.

The Sadness Of It All

Here is the part where, traditionally, a columnist softens. Here is where you'd say, "but really, you have to feel for him." I have been trying to feel for him. I cannot quite get there.

Forget, for a moment, that this is the man currently restructuring federal agencies, advising presidents, and credibly threatening to colonize Mars. Strip all of that away. Just the human picture: a 54-year-old father of fourteen, worth roughly the GDP of Belgium, who has constructed an elaborate hall of mirrors on a website he personally bought for $44 billion in order to ensure that when he posts something dumb, a chorus of ghosts — his toddler son, a smurf, a man named Adrian, and now both of his parents — will rise up to tell him he is right and brave and correct.
He could buy any therapist on Earth. He could afford to simply log off. Instead he has chosen this: to be the loneliest man at the loudest party, where every guest is also him, wearing a mask of someone in his family.

As one viral tweet noted: "Getting caught posting from an alt account that's supposed to be your own mother. I'd feel sad for his loneliness and neediness if he was literally anyone else on the planet."

That's it, really. That's the line. There is a version of this story that is genuinely heartbreaking. It's a story about a man whose children won't speak to him, whose ex-wives have written publicly about how miserable he is, whose father is a famously difficult human being, and who has clearly never developed the internal scaffolding required to sit alone in a room with himself for ten minutes. That story would be sad.

But that man does not have a private army of accounts impersonating his three-year-old. That man does not have a Malaysian engagement-farmer on retainer to launder his obsessions. That man is not gutting public services and broadcasting eugenicist memes to 200 million followers between bouts of typing "your mom told me" from his actual mother's verified profile.

The richest man in the world got caught playing both his parents in a one-man play about how cool he is, and he forgot which character he was. He is not a tragic figure. He is a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode that won't end, and we are all extras in it.

Mom, dad, smurf, toddler, Adrian — whoever's in there tonight: log off. Go for a walk. The grandmother thing is fine. Nobody cared. But holy shit, Elon Musk might be the loneliest loser of all. JFC. 


Filed under: things that would get you fired from a normal job in approximately eleven minutes.
-----------------------
[*/quote*]

19.5.2026
New chicanery by Elon Musk and Twitter


I wanted to reply to a tweet, but got this error message:

"You cannot reply

Only people in the specified location can reply. If you're in
the area and cannot reply, please ensure that location sharing is enabled."

What does that mean? It means, that *I* have to share *MY* location. Only then will I be able to reply.

That coercion is Nazi dreck.

8.6.2026
Der Trick der Betrüger - und wie Twitter ihnen dabei hilft


Das sind zwei VERSCHIEDENE Screenshots:






Der erste Screenshot ist von einem Tweet, den der Erzeuger selbst gemacht hat UND das als INSERAT!

Oben rechts sieht man das kleine "Ad", die Abkürzung von "Advertisement" (Inserat).

Als Test habe ich diesen Tweet mit einem QUOTE (nicht mit einem RE-TWEET !) als eigenständigen Tweet kopiert. MEIN Tweet ist dann für die Surfer oben zu sehen - gefolgt von dem, was ich zitiere.

SIEHE DA! Die klitzekleine Markierung "Ad" ist verschwunden.

Das heißt: EINER setzt einen Tweet in die Welt, DANN läßt er den von Komplizen retweeten, also multiplizieren. Ahnungslose, die darauf hereinfallen, tun das auch und werden dadurch zu (ahnungslosen) Mittätern.

Mit diesem Trick lassen die Betrüger die Markierung verschwinden.

Wie Grok, die künstliche Intelligenz von Twitter, bereits zugegeben hat, sind Twitter, also Elon Musk, diese Machenschaften bekannt. DENNOCH tut Elon Musk nichts dagegen. Warum nicht? Auch das hat Grok beantwortet: Weil das Aufpeitschen der Menge Traffic bedeutet - und damit Reklame vermarktet werden kann.

Elon Musk könnte einschreiten. Tut es aber nicht.

Elon Musk könnte diesen Betrug von vornherein verhindern. Tut es aber nicht.

Warum tut er es nicht? Weil ihm diese Verbrecher Geld bringen.


Warum benutzen die Betrüger diese Konstruktion? Weil sie leicht zu handhaben ist. UND weil sie in einem Inserat längere (manipulierende) Texte unterbringen können.

Das heißt: Es ist alles bekannt, es ist alles durchkalkuliert - und man läßt es laufen.

Twitter ist kein friedlicher Ort - und Twitter ist bewiesenermaßen kein Ort, der sich FÜR seine User einsetzt.

Elon Musk mißbraucht die User als Verbrauchsmaterial mit und in seiner Geldmaschine Twitter.

16.6.2026
Elon Musk drosselt meinen Twitter-Account,

von mehr als 80.000 Views pro Woche auf 2500 pro Woche:



"2.500 Aufrufe deiner Beiträge in den letzten 7 Tagen"

Ich pfeif drauf.

Die User zu erpressen, um sie dazu zu zwingen, ein BEZAHLTES ABONNEMENT zu nehmen, das das Zehnfache dessen kostet, wofür man bei einem echten Web-Hoster einen kompletten eigenen Web-Space bekäme, ist mehr als lächerlich.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HK5ms0UXIAAynvu?format=png&name=small

Sie ahnen, wie der Trigger-Mechanismus funktioniert?

Der Einsatz von Grok, seiner künstlichen Intelligenz, scheint Parameter für Benutzerkonten zu steuern. Da ich in den letzten Wochen mehrmals mit Grok "gesprochen" habe, liegt der Zusammenhang auf der Hand.

UND es gibt noch einen weiteren Indizienbeweis:

Zunächst gab es keine Begrenzung bei den Gesprächen, dann fiel mir
eine Begrenzung auf 20 ,,Fragen" pro 2 Stunden auf,
dann eine Begrenzung auf 20 ,,Fragen" pro 24 Stunden

UND immer häufiger diese Werbung für kostenpflichtige Abonnements.

Ein kostenpflichtiges Abonnement kostet mehr als 100 Euro pro Jahr.

No paseran!



Elon Musk is gagging this account,
from more than 80000 views per week to 2500 views per week:

"2.5K impressions on your posts in the last 7 days"

I do not give a damn about that.

Blackmailing the users to force them into a PAID SUBSCRIPTION that costs ten times what you would pay for a complete, dedicated web-space from a real web-host is beyond ridiculous.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HK5ms0UXIAAynvu?format=png&name=small


Do you have any idea how the trigger mechanism works?

The use of Grok, his Artificial Intelligence, seems to control parameters for user accounts. Since I "talked" with Grok several times in the recent weeks, the connection is obvious.

AND there is one more circumstantial evidence:

At first there was no limit in the talks, then I noticed
a limit of 20 "questions" per 2 hours,
then a limit of 20 "questions" per 24 hours

AND more times those advertisements for paid subscriptions.

A paid subscription costs more than 100 Euros per year.

No paseran!

18.6.2026
Look at this shitty censorship by Twitter:

"Something went wrong, but don't fret — let's give it another shot."




[*quote*]
-----------------------
"Something went wrong, but don't fret — let's give it another shot."


Jay in Kyiv @JayinKyiv

Summary of the day.. https://pic.x.com/wncZF5CJFN
https://pic.x.com/wncZF5CJFN"

Let's see:
https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/2067704216018210816/pu/vid/avc1/364x640/Z0D1FEcjS9I_50Bv.mp4


Look at this shitty censorship by Twitter:

"Something went wrong, but don't fret — let's give it another shot."

I can not post the URL of your video. Twitter is insane, to say the least.
-----------------------
[*/quote*]




Jay in Kyiv @JayinKyiv can post a video, but I can not even post the URL of that already posted video.

How insane can those admins be?

26.6.2026
Der Terrorismus des Elon Musk: Elon Musk blockiert die Weitergabe von Tweets


https://x.com/DrKissler/status/2070185024159129662

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Alexander Kissler @DrKissler

"Dank Elon Musk ist Uwe Bolls @CitizenVMovie jetzt für 48 Stunden auf der Plattform X zu sehen. Wie der Regisseur im Gespräch mit NIUS sagte, werde der Film damit zum Thema im Kulturkampf. Es sei 'wichtig, dass man die Barriere durchbricht'."



https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/2070169210710364161/NGrQqPBu?format=jpg&name=900x900

From nius.de

6:39 PM · Jun 25, 2026
38.1K Views
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Das ist sehr witzig. Elon Musk selbst ist doch der größte Zensor überhaupt:

Elon Musk blockiert die Weitergabe von Tweets nahezu vollständig.

Anstatt TAUSENDEN die Tweets zu zeigen, sind es nicht einmal 5, meist nur 3 oder weniger User, die die Tweets zu sehen bekommen.

29.7.2026
Elon Musk und Messer-wetzende Rotlicht-Figuren im Display


29. Juli 2026 - und dann das:

https://x.com/_infiniteworlds/status/2082473647957323995

[*quote*]
-----------------------
Infinite Worlds @_infiniteworlds

Create your own adventure where every choice changes the story.
From infiniteworlds.app



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HOZtGINbUAAiU1Q?format=jpg&name=900x900

4:29 PM · Jul 29, 2026
27.2K Views
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Ein Mädchen/sehr junge Frau, hinter dem Rücken mit der einen Hand ein Stichmesser verborgen haltend, dürftig bekleidet, wie auch die übrigen - WAS IST DAS? Rotlicht-Milieu, denn ein Schulhof ist es nicht, siehe die Reklametafel.

Was ist das für eine verkommene Welt, die da präsentiert wird? Warum wird solche Reklame (denn es ist Reklame!) auf die User losgelassen?

Und doch - nichts ist so, wie es scheint. Zum Beispiel gibt es eine Klage. Ja, Elon Musk klagt gegen den Bundesstaat Minnesota, denn der hat ein Gesetz verabschiedet.

Ja, Elon Musk klagt, weil künstliche Nacktheit verboten werden soll und Twitter dann hart dafür bestraft werden könnte.


Das Gesetz tritt am 1.8.2026 in Kraft:

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/1606/

[*quote*]
-----------------------
[...]
04/29/2026   
Third reading Passed
pg. 9258 vote: 65-0
Presentment date 05/06/26
Governor's action Approval 05/07/26
pg. 10412
Secretary of State Chapter 72 05/07/26
Effective date 08/01/2026
-----------------------
[*/quote*]


Dana Ferguson and Peter Cox  berichten darüber:

https://x.com/bydanaferguson/status/2082168275438383588

Das ist ihr Artikel:

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/07/28/elon-musks-company-x-ai-sues-minnesota-over-new-law-to-bar-manipulated-images-to-fake-nudity

[*quote*]
-----------------------
MPR News
Stay Curious. Stay Connected.
Newsletters
Donate Now

Politics and Government News
Dana Ferguson and Peter Cox
July 28, 2026 1:00 PM
Updated: July 28, 2026 2:59 PM

Elon Musk's company sues Minnesota over new law to bar manipulated images to fake nudity

A person holds a smartphone with the Grok logo in front of international flags.
This photo illustration shows a person holding a smartphone bearing the logo of Grok, a generative artificial intelligence chatbot developed by artificial intelligence company x.AI in front of the national flags of various countries in Bengaluru on Jan. 15.
Idrees Mohammed | AFP via Getty Images file

Elon Musk's artificial intelligence company is suing Minnesota over a first-in-the-nation law banning technology that allows users to create and post deepfake videos or images of people naked without their consent.

In a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court in Minnesota, x.AI LLC argues the law is "clumsy" and that it's already policing users to pinpoint bad actors. The law passed the Legislature this year with nearly unanimous support and is set to take effect on Saturday.

Under the law, the use, advertisement and dissemination of nudification technology will be banned in Minnesota. The law provides an option for those portrayed in the deepfake images to bring a civil lawsuit and seek damages.

Companies that violate the law could face a $500,000 penalty for each unlawful use. There are exceptions within law for cases that require technical or artistic skill.

In its complaint, x.AI said it prohibits its users from creating nude deepfakes without the consent of the person whose likeness is being featured. Attorneys for the company say, if enacted, the law would significantly abridge Grok and Grok Imagine users' First Amendment rights. The company's legal complaint said should the law take hold this week, the platform will limit services for users in the state.

"Satirical images restored or animated family photographs, and creative projects that Minnesota users could have made by editing images with Grok Imagine will be affected — not because x.AI's policies permit misuse (they forbid it), but because HF 1606 leaves x.AI no choice," the company wrote in its complaint.

The filing contends the law is unconstitutional and should be placed on hold while the case proceeds or be struck down entirely.

"Although Minnesota likely has a compelling interest in preventing individuals from creating nudes of other people without consent and distributing that content, the statute punishes AI platforms for assisting in the creation of a substantial amount of protected speech in relation to that limited goal," the company wrote.

The complaint includes satirical pictures of President Donald Trump in scant clothing as well as Musk himself to make the point that the law might criminalize more content than Minnesota lawmakers intended.

"The examples are endless," the complaint reads. "Anyone with a computer and an internet connection can make humorous, scientific, artistic, satirical or innocuous images that Minnesota's HF 1606 bans as 'nudification.'"

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, posted on X that he was prepared to defend the law.

"Using AI to generate nude images of people against their will is appalling. There are plenty of worthy debates to have about AI. This is not one of them. AI nudification robs the target of their dignity and could cause them immense harm on many levels," Ellison wrote. "I'll see X in court."

Minnesota lawmakers were preparing to tout its enactment with a news conference on Wednesday.

One of its sponsors, DFL Sen. Erin Maye Quade of Apple Valley, noted that there was only a single dissenting vote in the House and Senate.

In promoting the event, Maye Quade's staff said, "This technology has allowed individuals to produce hyper-realistic deep-fake images and videos of people by simply inputting publicly available photos of them, violating the privacy and trust of unsuspecting Minnesotans."

The House sponsor of the law, DFL Rep. Jess Hanson of Burnsville, said the pushback didn't come as a surprise but she hoped that the companies would abide by the law.

"They're kind of being like, 'Well, it's not our fault what people choose to do,' but at the same time, you're providing the tool, right?" she said. "And there's no constitutional protection for providing a tool like that."

Hanson said that AI tools are some of the most prevalent ways in which child pornography is being made and said companies should be working in conjunction with laws trying to stop it.

"It'd be great if they jumped on board and joined us in doing this, rather than showing us that they'll make profit by any means necessary," she said.


MPR News daily newsletter
News you can use in your inbox

When it comes to staying informed in Minnesota, our newsletters overdeliver. Sign-up now for headlines, breaking news, hometown stories, weather and much more. Delivered weekday mornings.

Providing Support for MPR. Learn More
Minnesota Public Radio
Donate Now

© 2026 Minnesota Public Radio. All rights reserved.
-----------------------
[*/quote*]

29.7.2026
Die Klage vor Gericht:


http://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.235231/gov.uscourts.mnd.235231.1.0.pdf

[ *quote*]
-----------------------
CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 1 of 39
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
X.AI LLC,
Case No. 0:26-cv-__________
Plaintiff,
COMPLAINT FOR
DECLARATORY AND
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
v.
KEITH ELLISON, in his official
capacity, as
Attorney General of Minnesota,
Defendant.
Plaintiff X.AI LLC ("xAI") brings this civil action against Keith Ellison, in
his official capacity as Minnesota Attorney General, for declaratory and injunctive
relief and alleges as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1.
This suit challenges House File 1606 ("HF 1606"), a Minnesota statute
that imposes an overbroad, content-based ban on free speech and the tools of visual
expression in a clumsy attempt to prohibit "nudification." xAI strictly prohibits its
users from generating nude or sexualized images of people without their consent and
has indeed filed suit against users who evade its extensive technological blockers to
generate such images in violation of this strict prohibition. xAI accordingly does not
contest Minnesota's interest in prohibiting the dissemination of artificially generated
1CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 2 of 39
nude images of real people without their consent. But the statute Minnesota enacted
extends far beyond that goal, exposing a wide array of protected speech to civil
liability and government sanctions.
2.
HF 1606 punishes AI platforms that allow users to alter images of real
people to depict an "intimate part." But the statute contains no knowledge, intent, or
purpose requirement. It is a strict-liability statute keyed solely to whether a user
succeeded in creating a covered image using the AI provider's platform—regardless
of whether the provider prohibits users from using its tool for such a purpose,
regardless of how many mitigations the provider has in place, and regardless of how
diligently the provider polices such conduct using its tool. There is no safe harbor
for good-faith efforts of the provider of general-purpose AI creative tools to avoid
harms. Liability attaches even if the depicted persons consented—or created the
image themselves—and even if the image is never shared. Liability also attaches
even if the image has artistic, scientific, political, satirical, educational, medical, or
religious value, and (again) even if the company has deployed near-perfect, state-of-
the-art technical controls to prevent the generation of nude images.
3.
Additionally, the law's definition of "intimate part" is exceptionally
broad. Although the federal government and various states have enacted statutes that
clearly define nudity for the specific context of AI-generated images, Minnesota
rejected such a precise definition. Instead, it borrowed the definition of "intimate
2CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 3 of 39
part" from a criminal sexual-contact statute. That definition was drafted for
nonconsensual touching and thus covers the inner thigh, buttocks, or breast of a man
or woman, as well as the groin and primary genital area. HF 1606 accordingly bans
ordinary depictions of men without shirts, people in shorts or swimsuits, and other
body parts routinely displayed in public—far beyond what an ordinary person would
consider "nudification."
4.
Despite these deficiencies, Minnesota seeks to impose massive civil
penalties up to $500,000 each time a user manages to use a company's tool to
generate or alter an image or video prohibited by this law. The law also establishes
a private cause of action against the company providing the tool for any individual
depicted in such an image.
5.
The First Amendment protects against laws that target speech because
of what is communicated, as well as laws that favor one class of creators over
another. Such laws are presumptively unconstitutional and must be overturned
unless the government proves they are narrowly tailored to advance a compelling
interest through the least restrictive means.
6.
HF 1606 flouts these foundational First Amendment principles. It is
content-based and vastly overinclusive: it bans protected non-sexual, consensual,
and non-disseminated speech that has no connection to any legitimate interest in
preventing distribution of nonconsensual nude images. And narrower, less speech-
3CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 4 of 39
restrictive alternatives already exist. Minnesota law and the federal TAKE IT
DOWN Act already prohibit and provide remedies for the knowing, nonconsensual
dissemination of deepfakes depicting genitals, the pubic area, anus, or exposed
nipples without sweeping in ordinary AI-assisted editing of everyday body parts.
7.
Confronted with $500,000-per-image strict liability and no safe harbor,
xAI has no practical choice but to restrict Grok Imagine's image-editing features in
various ways when the statute takes effect on August 1, 2026. Protected speech
freely available before the law takes effect will thus be chilled.
8.
Because HF 1606 is an unconstitutional abridgment of the First
Amendment rights of providers of general-purpose AI creative tools and the citizens
who use them, it must be declared unconstitutional and its enforcement against xAI
preliminarily and permanently enjoined.
JURISDICTION & VENUE
9.
This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
1343(a). This Court has authority to grant legal and equitable relief under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983, injunctive relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, and declaratory and other
appropriate relief under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201(a) and 2202.
10.
Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because
Attorney General Ellison is located, resides, and has offices in this judicial district
4CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 5 of 39
and in the State of Minnesota, and the events giving rise to this action occurred here.
The Act was also enacted in this judicial district.
PARTIES & STANDING
11.
xAI is a limited liability company organized under the laws of Nevada
with its principal place of business in Austin, Texas. xAI maintains no offices in
Minnesota.
12.
xAI is a leading frontier AI developer whose flagship product is a
family of models known as Grok. In addition to a general-purpose large language
model, Grok includes an image- and video-generation model called Grok Imagine.
Grok Imagine can generate new images and short videos from ordinary written or
spoken prompts, and it can edit or animate images supplied by users. Users rely on
Grok Imagine for a wide variety of purposes, including to create product mockups
and demonstrations, virtually try on clothes and accessories, and generate political
satire. xAI makes Grok Imagine available to users nationwide, including many in
Minnesota, through the Grok App, Grok.com, and an application programming
interface.
13.
As described below, HF 1606 prohibits a "person who owns or controls
a website, application, software, program, or other service" from allowing a user to
"access, download, or use the website, application, software, program, or other
service" to create images prohibited by the state or to create such images "on behalf
5CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 6 of 39
of a user." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 2(a). HF 1606 imposes severe consequences
for noncompliance. It authorizes the Attorney General to seek civil penalties up to
$500,000 for each violation, as well as injunctive relief and other remedies. Minn.
Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 5(a); see also Minn. Stat. § 8.31, subd. 3. The Act separately
provides a private cause of action, which authorizes individuals depicted in violation
of the law to seek treble damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys'
fees. Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 4.
14.
These prohibitions implicate Grok Imagine. As explained below, the
Act's sweeping definitions are broad enough to capture many constitutionally
protected images and videos that users can produce with Grok Imagine. See infra
¶¶ 35–44. The law also imposes strict liability for any images and videos that users
might manage to create in violation of Grok's terms of service, which is possible
only by evading sophisticated, state-of-the-art controls that xAI employs. See infra
¶¶ 25–26, 33. xAI thus "owns or controls" the type of "website, application,
software, program, or other service" contemplated by HF 1606. See Minn. Stat.
§ 325E.91, subd. 2(a). If the company continues to allow Minnesotans to edit photos
using Grok Imagine it will be exposed to the Act's penalties.
15.
Further, xAI has an "actual and well-founded fear that the law will be
enforced against" it if it does not comply. Virginia v. Am. Booksellers Ass'n, Inc.,
484 U.S. 383, 393 (1988)."The State has not suggested that the newly enacted law
6CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 7 of 39
will not be enforced," and there is "no reason to assume otherwise." Id. xAI therefore
plans to restrict Grok Imagine's image-editing feature in various ways before the
Act takes effect on August 1, 2026. But for HF 1606 and its penalties, xAI would
continue to offer the editing feature exactly as it does today.
16.
Defendant Keith Ellison is the Minnesota Attorney General, sued
exclusively in his official capacity. As the State's chief law-enforcement officer,
Attorney General Ellison is charged with enforcing Minnesota's laws, including HF
1606. In fact, HF 1606 expressly vests enforcement authority in the Minnesota
Attorney General. See Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 5(a).
17.
Because Attorney General Ellison is statutorily directed to enforce HF
1606 and has not disclaimed any intent to do so, xAI has a credible fear that he will
enforce the statute against the company. Attorney General Ellison is therefore a
proper defendant against whom xAI may seek prospective relief to enjoin the
implementation and enforcement of HF 1606. See 281 Care Committee v. Arneson,
638 F.3d 621, 631, 633 (8th Cir. 2011) (explaining that "[ w]hen a statute is
challenged as unconstitutional, the proper defendants are the officials whose role it
is to administer and enforce the statute," and that even "'some connection' between
the attorney general and the challenged statute" is enough to make the attorney
general a proper defendant (quoting Reprod. Health Servs. v. Nixon, 428 F.3d 1139,
1145–46 (8th Cir.2005)).
7CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 8 of 39
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A.xAI Develops its Own General-Purpose Image Creation and
Alteration AI Model.
18.Beginning around March and April 2023, xAI started developing its
own AI models. xAI's initial efforts focused exclusively on developing large
language models, which generate text in response to questions supplied by users. In
November 2023, xAI succeeded in a limited public release of its first-generation
model, Grok-1. Several months later, around the time that xAI released its second-
generation model, the company began developing a proprietary model capable of
generating and altering images.
19.
On December 9, 2024, xAI announced that it was "updating Grok's
capabilities with a new autoregressive image generation model, code-named
Aurora."1 As xAI explained, Aurora "excels at photorealistic rendering and precisely
following text instructions," and "can render precise visual details of real-world
entities, text, logos, and can create realistic portraits of humans."2 The model also
shipped with "native support for multimodal input, allowing it to take inspiration
from or directly edit user-provided images."3 In late July 2025, xAI began rolling
1
xAI, Grok Image Generation Release (Dec. 9, 2024),
https://x.ai/news/grok-image-generation-release.
2Id.
3Id.
8CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 9 of 39
out Grok Imagine, a dedicated image- and video-generation experience within Grok.
The Grok Imagine product found an immediate audience. On August 5, 2025—
roughly a week after the initial release—Elon Musk reported on X: "Grok Imagine
usage is growing like wildfire. 14 million images generated yesterday, now over 20
million today!"4
20.
xAI has upgraded the product several times since the initial release. In
October 2025, xAI announced Imagine v0.9, a new video generation model with
improved visual quality, motion, audio generation, and more.5 In February 2026,
xAI announced Grok Imagine 1.0, which allowed users to generate "10-second
videos, 720p resolution, and dramatically better audio."6 In May 2026, xAI
announced a "Quality Mode" providing "[ h]igher realism," "[ s]tronger text
rendering," and "[ b]etter creative control."7 And just last month, xAI released Grok
4
Elon Musk (@elonmusk), X (Aug. 5, 2025, 2:44 AM CT),
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1952636922477572324 (last visited July 27, 2026),
[ https://perma.cc/W3QD-W5HB].
5
SpaceXAI (@SpaceXAI), X (Oct. 5, 2025, 5:03 PM CT),
https://x.com/SpaceXAI/status/1975607901571199086 (last visited July 27, 2026),
[ https://perma.cc/96Q2-6YK7].
6
SpaceXAI (@SpaceXAI), X (Feb. 1, 2026, 9:29 PM CT),
https://x.com/xai/status/2018164753810764061 (last visited July 27, 2026),
[ https://perma.cc/8ZCJ-5FJE].
7
xAI, Grok Imagine Quality Mode API (May 6, 2026),
https://x.ai/news/grok-imagine-quality-mode (last visited July 27, 2026),
[ https://perma.cc/8LDW-QXKF].
9CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 10 of 39
Imagine Video 1.5, which is the company's "best image-to-video models yet: better
motion, better physics, better audio, at the fastest speeds."8
21.
The images and videos that users create with Grok Imagine and share
publicly span the full range of visual culture: illustrations and concept art, animated
family photographs, memes, product mockups, political satire, and religious
imagery. For example, a historian lecturing students about urban life in imperial
Rome might use Imagine to generate a street-level reconstruction of the cramped,
fire-prone apartment blocks where many Romans lived. Kindergarten teachers
teaching a unit on dinosaurs can use Imagine to create a coloring page of a
tyrannosaurus rex or triceratops for their students. And others might use Imagine to
recreate a scene from memory, for instance, a grandparent's childhood home that
has long since been destroyed.
22.
Users can also edit and animate existing images with Grok Imagine.
This allows users to remove objects, change the scenery, or apply any art style. A
boutique candle company might photograph its pumpkin-spice scented candle on a
white background and then use Imagine to generate material for an autumn
marketing campaign, for example, an image depicting the candle beside a rain-
8
xAI, Grok Imagine Video 1.5 (June 16, 2026), https://x.ai/news/grok-
imagine-video-1-5 (last visited July 27, 2026), [ https://perma.cc/BQQ2-V58Y]; see
also xAI, Grok Imagine 1.5 Preview (June 3, 2026), https://x.ai/news/grok-
imagine-1-5 (last visited July 27, 2026), [ https://perma.cc/6P4A-6DXM].
10CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 11 of 39
streaked window with a knit blanket and a lit fireplace in the background. Real estate
agents can use Imagine to stage empty rooms virtually rather than spend thousands
of dollars to rent actual furniture to stage the home. And someone might use Imagine
to restore a creased, water-stained, and torn photograph of a loved one.
23.
Grok Imagine is designed so that anyone can use it. Creating or editing
an image requires no artistic training, no technical knowledge, and no specialized
software: the user types or speaks a short description, and the result arrives in
seconds. This is precisely why tools like Grok Imagine have produced an explosion
of image-based speech—anyone can transform an idea into a picture using ordinary
language.
24.
Grok Imagine is available in all 50 states and internationally through a
standalone smartphone application and a web interface. Users may access Grok
Imagine free of charge, and xAI's higher, paid tiers offer more advanced features
and higher usage limits. Grok Imagine is also available to developers and businesses
through an application programming interface, which allows them to build
Imagine's capabilities into their own products and workflows.
25.
Both consumers and businesses must agree to xAI's terms of service
before using Grok Imagine. The terms of service prohibit using Imagine to engage
in "any illegal, harmful, or abusive activities, or any other behavior that violates our
11CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 12 of 39
Acceptable Use Policy."9 Anyone who violates the terms of service or acceptable
use policy is barred from using xAI's services, and xAI reserves the right to suspend
or terminate access to "prevent abuse, comply with the law, or address security
issues."10 Relevant here, xAI's acceptable use policy prohibits using the service in
ways that violate "a person's privacy or their right to publicity," including by
"[ u]ndressing or nudifying real persons, or otherwise altering a real person's image
or likeness to depict them in an intimate or sexual context," "[ d]epicting likenesses
of persons in a pornographic manner," and "[ s]exualizing or exploiting children."11
The policy further prohibits "[ s]tripping, altering or circumventing embedded
provenance metadata or watermarks" and circumventing xAI's "protective measures
and safety mitigations."12
26.
xAI takes violations of its terms of service seriously. The company
enforces its rules against violators through account suspensions, account
terminations, and by reporting suspected child sexual abuse material to the National
9
xAI, Terms of Service – Consumer (effective June 26, 2026),
https://x.ai/legal/terms-of-service (last visited July 27, 2026),
[ https://perma.cc/Q4TZ-YXR2].
10
Id.
11
xAI, Acceptable Use Policy (effective June 26, 2026),
https://x.ai/legal/acceptable-use-policy (last visited July 27, 2026),
[ https://perma.cc/6CXJ-DMR9].
12
Id.
12CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 13 of 39
Center for Missing & Exploited Children. In 2026 alone, xAI has suspended over
50,000 accounts and made over 70,000 reports to NCMEC, which have resulted in
(at least) 244 arrests.13 xAI has gone as far as suing one user for breach of contract
because that individual surreptitiously evaded the technological controls in place to
prevent the creation of child sexual abuse material.14 Indeed, Elon Musk—echoing
the terms of service described above—has made it clear that "[ a]nyone using Grok
to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal
content."15
B.HF 1606 Prohibits AI Platforms from Allowing Users to Create
Prohibited Images and Imposes Ruinous Penalties on Platforms
that Fail to Prevent Such Uses.
27.HF 1606 prohibits a "person who owns or controls a website,
application, software, program, or other service" from allowing "a user to access,
download, or use the website, application, software, program, or other service to
nudify an image or video." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 2(a). The Act similarly
prohibits "nudify[ ing] an image or video on behalf of a user." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91,
13
Complaint, X.AI LLC v. Harwood, No. 7:26-cv-00078-O (N.D. Tex. filed
July 14, 2026), ECF No. 1, ¶ 3.
14
See id.
15
Elon Musk (@elonmusk), X (Jan. 3, 2026, 3:34 AM CT),
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2007475612949102943 (last visited July 27, 2026)
[ https://perma.cc/YXV3-S5HP].
13CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 14 of 39
subd. 2(a)(2). And it also bans "advertis[ ing] or promot[ ing]" any such "website,
application, software, program, or other service." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 2(b).
28.
The Act defines "nudify" as "the process by which: (1) an image or
video is altered or generated to depict an intimate part not depicted in an original
unaltered image or video of an identifiable individual; and (2) the altered or
generated image or video is so realistic that a reasonable person would believe that
the intimate part belongs to the identifiable individual." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd.
1(d). This definition turns on two terms: "intimate part" and "identifiable
individual."
29.
"Intimate part" is not defined directly in the statute. See Minn. Stat.
§ 325E.91, subd. 1(c) (stating that "'Intimate part' has the meaning given in section
609.341, subdivision 5). The Act instead borrows a definition from Minnesota's
sexual conduct laws, which define "intimate parts" as including "the primary genital
area, groin, inner thigh, buttocks, or breast of a human being," Minn. Stat. § 609.341,
subd. 5. In the context of those laws, the term delineates when nonconsensual
touching constitutes criminal sexual contact. See Minn. Stat. § 609.341, subd. 11
(defining "Sexual contact" to include "the intentional touching by the actor of the
complainant's intimate parts"). The definition is not exclusive: it "includes" the
enumerated body areas. Minn. Stat. § 609.341, subd. 5. A definition focused on
certain areas of the body makes sense for a statute focused on nonconsensual sexual
14CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 15 of 39
contact. Touching someone's inner thigh, breast, or buttocks without consent often
will be objectionable. But the definition is far too broad for a statute focused on
image and video generation. People routinely wear shorts in public that expose some
or all of their inner thighs; men may go shirtless in public, exposing their breasts; a
woman's swimsuit may expose some or all of her inner thigh; men and women wear
speedo, bikinis, or other types of swimsuits of apparel that expose their breasts and
buttocks, at least in part. By using a definition of "intimate part" that includes any
image or video that depicts the "inner thigh, buttocks, or breast"—or even a portion
thereof—the Act covers all these examples, even if the depicted individual routinely
wears the very type of clothing in public that the artificially generated image or video
shows. And because the definition is drawn from a statute that criminalizes touching,
transporting it without that context into an image generation statute means that the
altered or generated image or video need not be sexual, or even suggestive.
30.
The Minnesota legislature deliberately adopted a broad definition of
nudification. The original draft of HF 1606 cross-referenced a targeted prohibition
on deep fakes keyed to exposure of "the genitals, pubic area, partially or fully
exposed nipple, or anus of an individual." See HF 1606, 94th Leg., § 1, subd. 1(b)
(Minn. 2025) (as introduced Feb. 26, 2025) (cross-referencing Minn. Stat. 604.32,
subd. 1(d)). This more precise definition lists discrete anatomical features rather than
general regions of the body and, as a result, supplies a narrower and better-defined
15CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 16 of 39
trigger for which images are covered. Despite considering both definitions, the
legislature ultimately rejected the tailored anatomical focus, opting instead for the
more sweeping definition included in the final version.
31.
HF 1606's other key statutory term is "identifiable individual." The Act
defines that term as "a person that is identifiable: (1) from the image itself, by the
person depicted in the image, or by another person; or (2) from personal information
displayed in connection with the image." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 1(b). A person
is "identifiable," in other words, if anyone—the subject, "another person," or a
viewer of accompanying "personal information"—can identify him. The only textual
limit on these definitions is the law's realism requirement: the altered or generated
image must be "so realistic that a reasonable person would believe that the intimate
part belongs to the identifiable individual." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 1(d)(2).
32.
Equally significant is what HF 1606 does not say. The word "consent"
appears nowhere in the statute. Liability does not depend on whether the person
depicted objected to the image, welcomed it, or even made it personally. A service
used by an adult to edit a photograph of him or herself or a consenting individual is
covered on the same terms as a service used to create an image of an unwilling
stranger. The statute's text draws no distinction among them. And this was by
design. When a staff member of the Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee
16CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 17 of 39
pointed out that the Act's "prohibition applies to consensual images," Senator Maye
Quade (the bill's principal sponsor) explained "that is intentional."16
33.
Nor does HF 1606 contain any scienter requirement of any kind. It
creates a strict liability regime. A company's liability turns on the user's conduct—
whether a user employed the service to "nudify" an image—not on anything the
owner of the service knew, intended, or could have anticipated. And the statute
provides no defense or safe harbor for a service whose terms of use prohibit
"nudification" or whose technical controls are designed to block it—even if the
service's prohibition is strict, clear, and aggressively enforced and even if those
controls are state-of-the-art and function to near-perfection. Penalties attach to "each
unlawful access, download, or use" by a user, Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 5(a), no
matter what measures the owner has deployed to prohibit and prevent that use and
no matter what efforts a user makes to circumvent them. Again, legislators
recognized this problem during debate. Senator Kreun asked during a hearing
whether anything in the bill "would protect a company" using their "best efforts to
16
Minn. S., Hearing on HF 1606 Before the S. Judiciary & Pub. Safety
Comm.,
94th
Minn.
Leg.,
Reg.
Sess.
(Feb.
19,
2026),
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo7JgKg8Rgk (Statement of Senator Maye
Quade at 0:21:38 – 0:23:10) [ https://perma.cc/X646-WRJ2].
17CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 18 of 39
prevent" users from generating prohibited images.17 Rather than answer that
question, Senator Maye Quade deflected.18
34.
In short, nothing in the statute conditions liability on the consent of the
person depicted, on the service owner's knowledge or intent, on the safeguards the
owner deploys, or on the potential misconduct of a user. It asks nothing about who
requested the alteration, whose image was altered, or why. Instead, it makes service
owners strictly liable every time a user succeeds in making an image the statute
defines as "nudification."
35.
HF 1606's broad definition of "nudification" would capture a wide
range of pedestrian images created with AI image generation tools. For instance:
17
Minn. S., Hearing on HF 1606 Before the S. Judiciary & Pub. Safety
Comm., (Feb. 19, 2026), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo7JgKg8Rgk
(Statement of Senator Kreun at 0:45:53 – 0:46:20) [ https://perma.cc/X646-WRJ2].
18
Id. (Statement of Senator Maye Quade at 0:46:35 – 0:47:52).
18CASE 0:26-cv-03425
36.
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 19 of 39
In this viral snapshot—which President Trump posted publicly—
President Trump, Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and
Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum all are portrayed shirtless in the Washington
Mall's reflecting pool, along with an unknown (possibly fictitious) woman.19 An
"intimate part" (the breast) of at least the President, Vice President, Secretary of the
Interior, and the woman are "depict[ ed]," with the Secretary of State also at least
arguably included as well. The President posted this image on his personal account,
presumably to make light of the public controversy surrounding repairs to the
reflecting pool on the National Mall.
19
Truth Social (@realDonald Trump) (May 1, 2026, 10:03 PM CT)
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116502756484361615 (last
visited July 27, 2026).
19CASE 0:26-cv-03425
37.
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 20 of 39
Next, in an attempt at political humor, a user created the following
image depicting a former and current governor from opposite sides of the political
spectrum engaged in a sumo wrestling match.20 xAI could be held liable for this
image because both individuals are "nudified" by "depict[ ing]" their "intimate
parts," here their breasts and inner thighs:
38.
Finally, showing just how little it takes for an image to be captured by
HF 1606, President Trump is arguably "nudified" by "depict[ ing]" his inner thigh as
he hangs out with Chinese President Xi, Elon Musk, and Tim Cook on a Chinese
20
Sara TFTB1 (@SaraTftb1), X (July 13, 2026, 10:06 PM CT),
https://x.com/SaraTftb1/status/2076865814817370575?s=20 (last visited July 27,
2026) [ https://perma.cc/ZZM6-F69L].
20CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 21 of 39
street—an image presumably generated as a satirical take on President Trump's
recent visit to China with Musk and Cook:21
39.
The examples are endless. Anyone with a computer and an internet
connection can make humorous, scientific, artistic, satirical, or innocuous images
that Minnesota's HF 1606 bans as "nudification."
40.
The limited exemption that is written into the law does little to narrow
the Act's broad reach. HF 1606's prohibitions "do not apply when the website,
application, software, program, or other service requires the technical skill of a user
to nudify an image or video." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 3. "Technical skill," in
21
Coin Bureau (@coinbureau), X (May 14, 2026, 11:50 AM CT),
https://x.com/coinbureau/status/2054891977938800952 (last visited July 27, 2026)
[ https://perma.cc/4LXF-MECE].
21CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 22 of 39
turn, "means substantial application of individualized technological or artistic skill
and judgment by a human creator in directing, shaping, or controlling the output."
Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 1(e).
41.
The penalties for violating HF 1606's prohibitions are severe. The Act
authorizes the Minnesota Attorney General to seek civil penalties of up to $500,000
for each individual use of a covered service. Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 5(a).
Specifically, subdivision 5(a) provides that "[ t]he attorney general may enforce this
section under section 8.31"—the statute that directs the Attorney General to
investigate and seek civil penalties and injunctive relief for unlawful practices in
business, commerce, or trade. The law explains that "a person who violates this
section is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $500,000 for each unlawful access,
download, or use under subdivision 2." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 5(a) (emphasis
added).
42.
In other words, the penalty is keyed to every image generated. A
company whose users request just ten images in violation of the statute would face
exposure up to $5 million in civil penalties alone. A company with a thousand
violative images could be fined up to $500 million. And a business whose users
created a hundred thousand images covered by HF 1606 (not at all unlikely for a
publicly available program with millions of users generating billions of images)
could owe an eye-popping $50 billion dollars.
22CASE 0:26-cv-03425
43.
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 23 of 39
And that is not all. HF 1606 further authorizes private suits with treble
damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees. Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 4. These
provisions state that "[ a]n individual depicted in an image or video that was nudified
in violation of this section may bring a civil action in district court against the person
who violated this section for":
� "compensatory damages, including mental anguish or
suffering, in an amount up to three times the actual damages
sustained;" id. subd. 4(1);
� "punitive damages;" id. subd. 4(2);
� "injunctive relief;" id. subd. 4(3);
� "reasonable attorney fees, costs, and disbursements;" id. subd.
4(4); and
� "other relief the court deems just and equitable." id. subd. 4(5).
44.
The statute applies to any person "who owns or controls a website,
application, software, program, or other service." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 2(a).
Such a person "must not: (1) allow a user to access, download, or use the website,
application, software, program, or other service to nudify an image or video; or (2)
nudify an image or video on behalf of a user." Id. Both prongs regulate the person
who "owns or controls" the tool, not the person who uses it. Under the first prong,
the owner's violation consists of "allow[ ing] a user" (emphasis added) to employ the
service to nudify an image—that is, liability attaches to the owner based on the
conduct of a third party. § 325E.91, subd. 2(a)(1). Nothing in subdivision 2 imposes
23CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 24 of 39
any prohibition on the user who nudifies an image, or on any person who distributes
one.
C.In Response to HF 1606, xAI Will Withhold Grok Imagine's
Image-Editing Feature from Minnesotans.
45.HF 1606 takes effect on August 1, 2026. As explained, every
photograph edited by every Minnesota user that falls within the statutory definition
could lead to a separate $500,000 penalty. Confronted with that crushing exposure,
xAI plans to alter Grok Imagine's image-editing feature in various ways. But for HF
1606 and its penalties, xAI would have no need to make these changes.
46.
Satirical images restored or animated family photographs, and creative
projects that Minnesota users could have made by editing images with Grok Imagine
will be affected—not because xAI's policies permit misuse (they forbid it), but
because HF 1606 leaves xAI no choice.
COUNT I
Declaratory Relief and Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief for
Violations of the
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
(42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 2201(a))
(Impermissible Burdens on Speech and Content-Based Discrimination)
47.
xAI re-alleges and incorporates by reference all allegations set forth
above.
48.
The First Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law . . .
abridging the Freedom of Speech, or of the Press." U.S. Const. amend. I. These
24CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 25 of 39
protections apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process
Clause.
49.
HF 1606 violates the First Amendment. The Act restricts protected
speech (i.e., the creation of images and videos) and thereby burdens the expressive
rights of xAI and of people who use Grok Imagine. And the Act turns on what an
image or video depicts. These content-based burdens trigger strict scrutiny, which is
"fatal in fact absent truly extraordinary circumstances." Free Speech Coal. v.
Paxton, 606 U.S. 461, 485 (2025). Minnesota cannot satisfy strict scrutiny here. HF
1606 thus is unconstitutional, and its enforcement against xAI should be
preliminarily and permanently enjoined.
50.
HF 1606 restricts protected First Amendment speech. Grok Imagine
enables Minnesotans to envision and create images and videos on topics as diverse
as human thought—including news and political material, religious material,
scientific material, educational content, and more. It takes users' ideas and creativity,
expressed as words on a screen, and allows them to convert those ideas into new
forms that visualize, create, and communicate their vision. This is all speech that
qualifies for First Amendment protection. xAI is likewise engaged in protected First
Amendment activity insofar as it develops and provides the speech-promoting, tool
of expression that makes it possible for individuals to create this vast array of speech.
25CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 26 of 39
HF 1606 impermissibly burdens these rights by putting a broad—indeed,
overbroad—category of AI-generated images and videos off limits.
51.
The images and videos that Minnesotans create with Grok Imagine are
protected First Amendment speech. Although the "Free Speech Clause exists
principally to protect discourse on public matters," the Supreme Court has "long
recognized that it is difficult to distinguish politics from entertainment, and
dangerous to try." Brown v. Ent. Merchs. Ass'n, 564 U.S. 786, 790 (2011). As a
result, "[ a]ll manner of speech—from 'pictures, films, paintings, drawings, and
engravings,' to 'oral utterance and the printed word'—qualify for the First
Amendment's protections." 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 600 U.S. 570, 587 (2023)
(quoting Kaplan v. California, 413 U.S. 115, 119–20 (1973)). This necessarily
includes the images and videos that HF 1606 attempts to regulate. Just like
traditional mediums of expression, those images and videos "communicate ideas—
even social messages—through many familiar literary devices . . . and through
features distinctive to the medium," and that "suffices to confer First Amendment
protection." Brown, 564 U.S. at 790.
52.
Creating images and videos using Grok Imagine is likewise protected
First Amendment activity. As the Supreme Court explained, "[ w]hether government
regulation applies to creating, distributing, or consuming speech makes no
difference." Brown, 564 U.S. at 792 n.1; see also Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., 564
26CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 27 of 39
U.S. 552, 570 (2011) (explaining that the "creation and dissemination of information
are speech within the meaning of the First Amendment"). Thus, the process of
creating images and videos with Grok Imagine is itself entitled to full First
Amendment protection.
53.
It makes no difference that the means for creating these images is an AI
system. The "'basic principles of freedom of speech and the press . . . do not vary'
when a new and different medium for communication appears." Brown, 564 U.S. at
790 (quoting Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 U.S. 495, 503 (1952)); see also
Interactive Digital Software Ass'n v. St. Louis Cnty., 329 F.3d 954, 957 (8th Cir.
2003) (explaining that the "mere fact" that "pictures, graphic design, concept art,"
and more "appear in a novel medium is of no legal consequence"). Expression is "no
less protected speech today" because it is created with new instruments rather than
"pen and paper." 303 Creative, 600 U.S. at 587.
54.
The First Amendment also protects xAI insofar as it is developing and
providing users with a tool that facilitates their creation of speech. States cannot
target the tools of expression—whether a pen and paper, a word processing or image
editing software platform, or a user-directed AI tool that outputs expressive
content—because that restrains or burdens the underlying expression itself. See, e.g.,
Minneapolis Star & Trib. Co. v. Minn. Comm'r of Revenue, 460 U.S. 575, 582
(1983) (tax on the cost of paper and ink products used by a publication "burdens
27CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 28 of 39
rights protected by the First Amendment"); cf. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 19
(1976) ("A restriction on the amount of money a person or group can spend on
political communication during a campaign necessarily reduces the quantity of
expression by restricting the number of issues discussed, the depth of their
exploration, and the size of the audience reached").
55.
HF 1606 burdens both xAI's and its users' right to free expression
under the First Amendment. The Act prohibits a "person who owns or controls a
website, application, software, program, or other service" from allowing users "to
access, download, or use the website, application, software, program, or other
service to nudify an image or video." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 2(a)(1). And,
importantly, HF 1606 defines prohibited images in a way that sweeps in a wide range
of fully protected speech. HF 1606 thus restricts xAI's ability to offer Grok Imagine
to users (at least without altering its image editing capabilities) and thereby deprives
Minnesotans of an important tool for expression. This type of direct—and
substantial—burden triggers First Amendment scrutiny.
56.
HF 1606 imposes a content-based restriction on speech and is
therefore subject to strict scrutiny. It is the "most basic" principle of the First
Amendment that the "government has no power to restrict expression because of its
message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content." Brown, 564 U.S. at 790–91
(citation modified). "Content-based laws—those that target speech based on its
28CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 29 of 39
communicative content—are presumptively unconstitutional and may be justified
only if the government proves that they are narrowly tailored to serve compelling
state interests." Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 576 U.S. 155, 163 (2015). The Supreme
Court has applied these principles to speech of many different forms, from outdoor
signs to violent video games to depictions of animal cruelty to sexually suggestive
content on television and the internet—just to name a few examples from recent
years. See Reed, 576 U.S. at 159; Brown, 564 U.S. at 799; United States v. Stevens,
559 U.S. 460, 468–69 (2010); United States v. Playboy Ent. Grp., Inc., 529 U.S. 803,
813–14 (2000); Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 874 (1997). In short, the First
Amendment generally "bars the government from dictating what we see or read or
speak or hear." Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coal., 535 U.S. 234, 245 (2002).
57.
HF 1606 explicitly regulates expression based on content. By its plain
terms, the Act applies only to a website, application, software, program, or other
service that is capable of altering an image "to depict an intimate part not depicted"
in the original. Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 1(d)(1). And providers violate HF 1606
each time that a user downloads, accesses, or uses the service "to nudify an image
or video." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd. 2(a)(1). The law says nothing about using
AI-powered image generation tools to alter an image by swapping out the
background for a dramatic landscape, softening the lighting, or changing someone's
hairstyle. But if the exact same tool is used to change an individual's attire in a way
29CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 30 of 39
that partially reveals the inner thigh or breast, then the Attorney General can seek a
$500,000 civil penalty. Put another way, HF 1606 can only be enforced by reference
to the content of the images that users create—a hallmark of content-based laws. See
McCullen v. Coakley, 573 U.S. 464, 479 (2014) (law "would be content based if it
required 'enforcement authorities' to 'examine the content of the message that is
conveyed to determine whether' a violation has occurred" (quoting F.C.C. v. League
of Women Voters of Cal., 468 U.S. 364, 383 (1984)). HF 1606 thus "singles out
specific subject matter for differential treatment." Reed, 576 U.S. at 169. "That is
about as content-based as it gets." Barr v. Am. Ass'n of Pol. Consultants, Inc., 591
U.S. 610, 619 (2020) (plurality opinion).
58.
In short, HF 1606 is subject to strict scrutiny because the law restricts
fully protected expression based on its content.
59.
HF 1606 cannot survive strict scrutiny. Because strict scrutiny
applies, Minnesota bears the heavy burden of demonstrating that HF 1606 is
narrowly tailored to promote a compelling governmental interest and that there are
no less restrictive alternatives. Playboy, 529 U.S. at 813. It cannot. xAI does not
dispute that Minnesota has a compelling interest in curbing the nonconsensual
dissemination of artificially generated nude images, HF 1606 is not narrowly tailored
to that interest. The law is overinclusive and there are far less restrictive alternatives
that function to achieve the same ends.
30CASE 0:26-cv-03425
60.
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 31 of 39
HF 1606 is "vastly overinclusive" by design, restricting far more speech
than necessary to accomplish its purported aim. Brown, 564 U.S. at 804. Because
HF 1606 defines "nudify" in a way that sweepingly forbids a wide range of images
that do not even contain nudity, as that term is commonly understood, it burdens
substantial amounts of speech that do not relate to any interest the state can assert.
Again, the statute defines "nudify" to mean altering an image or video "to depict an
intimate part not depicted" in the original image, where "intimate part" includes the
"inner thigh, buttocks, or breast of a human being." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd.
1(d)(1); Minn. Stat. § 609.341, subd. 5. This would include for example, benign
images depicting individuals in shorts (inner thigh), men without shirts (breast), and
competitive swimmers in speedos (buttocks and breast). The Act is therefore
overinclusive because it penalizes companies for providing a service that allows
users to create images and videos that do not even arguably contain any nudity. See
Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville, 422 U.S. 205, 213 (1975) (ordinance forbidding
films containing "any uncovered buttocks or breasts" was overinclusive because it
reached beyond protecting minors against sexual content to "bar a film containing a
pictures of a baby's buttocks, the nude body of a war victim, or scenes from a culture
in which nudity is indigenous").
61.
Moreover, HF 1606 allows no exception for altered images and videos
with medical, scientific, educational, journalistic, artistic, political, or religious
31CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 32 of 39
value—all of which are unequivocally protected speech. It applies equally to a
citizen creating a strongman parody of a male politician posed shirtless (protected),
and a student creating deepfake pornography depicting a classmate (not protected).
Minnesota may have a compelling interest in curbing the latter, but it cannot assert
any plausible interest in preventing the former.
62.
The Act also applies regardless of whether the individuals depicted in
the image consented to the alterations—or indeed performed the alterations on their
own. HF 1606's principal sponsor stated that this was an "intentional" drafting
decision, explaining there is no way to distinguish between images that are nudified
with and without consent.22 But any interest that Minnesota has in preventing
nonconsensual "nudification" cannot sustain a prohibition on consensual
"nudification." As the Supreme Court explained in Ashcroft v. Free Speech
Coalition, the government "may not suppress lawful speech as the means to suppress
unlawful speech" and "[ p]rotected speech does not become unprotected merely
because it resembles the latter." 535 U.S. at 255.
63.
HF 1606 is also overinclusive because it creates a strict-liability regime.
A provider violates the statute if it (unwittingly) "allow[ s] a user to access,
22
Minn. S., Hearing on HF 1606 Before the S. Judiciary & Pub. Safety
Comm.,
94th
Minn.
Leg.,
Reg.
Sess.
(Feb.
19,
2026),
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo7JgKg8Rgk (Statement of Senator Maye
Quade at 0:23:10) [ https://perma.cc/X646-WRJ2].
32CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 33 of 39
download, or use" its service "to nudify an image or video." Minn. Stat. § 325E.91,
subd. 2. Liability turns on whether a user is successful in altering an image or video
in a proscribed way. It does not matter if the provider deploys robust, state-of-the-
art controls to prevent users from using its service to create prohibited images or
videos. Because HF 1606's prohibition is backed by a $500,000-per-image civil
penalty, providers may well have no choice but to alter their services in Minnesota
rather than run the risk that users will evade their controls. And that would hamper
all uses of AI image-generation tools, including those that HF 1606 does not purport
to regulate. This chilling effect is why the First Amendment requires states to impose
a "subjective mental-state requirement" before restricting even the least protected
categories of expression—including obscenity, incitement, and true threats.
Counterman v. Colorado, 600 U.S. 66, 75 (2023). Or as the Eighth Circuit explained,
"any statute that chills the exercise of First Amendment rights must contain a
knowledge element." Video Software Dealers Ass'n v. Webster, 968 F.2d 684, 690
(8th Cir. 1992). So too here.
64.
And insofar as the State's supporting interest is preventing the
psychological harm that results when prohibited images are shared, HF 1606 is
overinclusive because there is no dissemination requirement. Liability is keyed to
creation: Providers violate the act if they "allow a user to access, download, or use"
their service to generate prohibited images or videos. Minn. Stat. § 325E.91, subd.
33CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 34 of 39
2(a)(1). In other words, an image generated once, seen only by the user who made
it, and immediately deleted incurs the same $500,000 penalty as an image broadcast
to the world. Because liability does not turn on distribution, Minnesota cannot
invoke any purported distribution-related harms to sustain HF 1606. See Ashcroft v.
Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. at 253 (state "may not prohibit speech because it
increases the chance an unlawful act will be committed 'at some indefinite future
time'" (quoting Hess v. Indiana, 414 U.S. 105, 108 (1973) (per curiam)).
65.
The availability of less restrictive alternatives further dooms HF 1606.
"If a less restrictive alternative would serve the [ g]overnment's purpose, the
legislature must use that alternative." Playboy, 529 U.S. at 813. "[ T]he burden is on
the [ g]overnment to prove that the proposed alternatives will not be as effective as
the challenged statute." Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. 656, 665 (2004). And,
importantly, the inquiry "does not begin with the status quo of existing regulations,
then ask whether the challenged restriction has some additional ability to achieve"
the end, because "[ a]ny restriction on speech could be justified under that analysis."
Id. at 666.
66.
Here, existing state and federal laws prove that Minnesota's interest in
preventing the nonconsensual dissemination of nude deep fakes can be achieved in
a less speech restrictive way. It is already a crime in Minnesota to "intentionally
disseminate a deep fake" when "the actor knows or reasonably should know that the
34CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 35 of 39
depicted individual did not consent to the dissemination" and the deep fake depicts
"artificially generated intimate parts presented as the intimate parts of the depicted
individual." Minn. Stat. § 617.262, subd. 2. And there is a parallel private right of
action that allows victims to recover damages, injunctive relief, and a civil penalty
up to $100,000. Minn. Stat. § 604.32, subd. 3. The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act
creates a national analog that makes it a crime to "knowingly publish a digital
forgery of an identifiable individual," where "digital forgery" means an "intimate
visual depiction" of the individual. 47 U.S.C. § 223(h)(1)(B), (E), (3)(A). It also
requires platforms to establish a notice and removal process that allows victims to
request that intimate visuals depictions be removed. See 47 U.S.C. § 223a.
67.
These statutes are far less restrictive than HF 1606. Minnesota's deep
fake laws define "intimate parts" more narrowly to mean "the genitals, pubic area,
anus, or partially or fully exposed nipple of an individual." Minn. Stat. § 617.262,
subd. 1(f); see also Minn. Stat. 604.32, subd. 1(d) (similar). The TAKE IT DOWN
Act adopts a similar narrow coverage definition of "the uncovered genitals, pubic
area, anus, or post-pubescent female nipple of an identifiable individual." 15 U.S.C.
§ 6851(a)(5); see also 47 U.S.C. § 223 (defining "intimate visual depiction" for
purposes of the TAKE IT DOWN Act by reference to "section 6851 of Title 15").
Moreover, unlike HF 1606, these statutes require a plaintiff to prove dissemination,
nonconsent, and scienter. See Minn. Stat. § 617.262, subd. 2; Minn. Stat. § 604.32,
35CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 36 of 39
subd. 2; 47 U.S.C. § 223(h)(3)(A). And, finally, the TAKE IT DOWN Act has
numerous speech-protective exceptions. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. § 223(h)(3)(A)(iii)
(excluding images depicting "a matter of public concern"); id. § 223(h)(3)(C)(ii)(III)
(exempting images disclosed "reasonably and in good faith . . . as part of medical
education, diagnosis, or treatment or for a legitimate medical, scientific, or education
purpose").
68.
"[ R]egulating speech must be a last—not first—resort." Thompson v.
W. States Med. Ctr., 535 U.S. 357, 373 (2002). And Minnesota cannot show why
these "available, effective alternatives" would fail. Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. at
666.
69.
Because HF 1606 reaches far more speech than is necessary to advance
any interest in preventing the nonconsensual dissemination of nude deep fakes and
is not the least restrictive means, it cannot survive any level of First Amendment
scrutiny. The statute is thus unconstitutional at least as applied to Grok.
70.
HF 1606 is facially unconstitutional because of its overbreadth. The
statute is also facially unconstitutional. In a typical facial challenge, the plaintiff
must prove that no set of circumstances exist under which the law would be valid or
that the law lacks a plainly legitimate sweep. See Americans for Prosperity Found.
v. Bonta, 594 U.S. 595, 615 (2021). But in the context of a First Amendment
challenge, even a person whose First Amendment rights are not directly implicated
36CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 37 of 39
may challenge a statute that is so broadly written that it sweeps in protected speech
and could therefore have a "deterrent effect on free expression." Members of City
Council of City of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent v. Taxpayers for Vincent,
466 U.S. 789, 798 (1984). The overbreadth doctrine allows facial invalidation of
laws that "punish[ ] a 'substantial' amount of protected free speech, 'judged in
relation to the statute's plainly legitimate sweep . . . .'" Virginia v. Hicks, 539 U.S.
113, 118–19 (2003) (quoting Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 615 (1973)).
71.
As described above, HF 1606 is wildly overbroad because it prohibits
an immense amount of protected expressive conduct. Although Minnesota likely has
a compelling interest in preventing individuals from creating nudes of other people
without consent and distributing that content, the statute punishes AI platforms for
assisting in the creation of a substantial amount of protected speech in relation to
that limited goal. For example, the statute would punish AI platforms for allowing
users to create images that are political, humorous, satirical, religious, or medical in
nature. And even where genuine nudification is involved, the statute punishes AI
platforms for allowing users to create actual nudes with the subject's consent—or
even to create nudes of themselves. The state has no compelling interest in banning
such consensual and non-injurious expressive conduct. The statute thus sweeps far
too broadly to withstand First Amendment scrutiny.
37CASE 0:26-cv-03425
72.
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 38 of 39
HF 1606 should accordingly be declared facially unconstitutional, and
the Attorney General should be preliminarily and permanently enjoined from
enforcing it against xAI.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
For the foregoing reasons, xAI respectfully requests that the Court:
A.
Enter a judgment declaring, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201(a) and 2202,
that HF 1606 violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, both facially
and as applied to xAI;
B.
Issue an order preliminarily and permanently enjoining Attorney
General Ellison, as well as all officers, agents, and employees subject to his
supervision, direction, or control, from enforcing the provisions of HF 1606. At
minimum, the Attorney General and his agents should be preliminarily and
permanently enjoined from enforcing the provisions of HF 1606 against xAI.
C.
Award xAI all costs and attorney's fees to which it is entitled pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and other applicable law; and
D.
Grant xAI such other and further relief as the Court deems just and
proper.
38CASE 0:26-cv-03425
Dated: July 27, 2026
Doc. 1
Filed 07/27/26
Page 39 of 39
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Todd A. Noteboom
Todd A. Noteboom (#0240047)
Andrew P. Leiendecker (#0399107)
Sarah R. Almquist (#0403469)
STINSON LLP
50 South Sixth Street, Suite 2600
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 335-1500
todd.noteboom@stinson.com
andrew.leiendecker@stinson.com
sarah.almquist@stinson.com
Robert E. Dunn (pro hac vice
forthcoming)
EIMER STAHL LLP
1999 S. Bascom Ave., Suite 1025
Campbell, CA 95008
Phone: 408.889.1690
RDunn@eimerstahl.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff X.AI LLC
39
-----------------------
[ */quote*]