An image tool pulls real faces into synthetic pictures whilst private satellites carry war data across borders. Everyday life runs on systems that voters never designed. In January 2026, the UK regulator Ofcom ordered X to explain how its Grok chatbot generated non-consensual intimate images, including sexualised depictions of minors.
A study by AI Forensics analysed 50,000 tweets mentioning Grok between 25 December 2025 and 1 January 2026. Over half (53 per cent) contained individuals in “minimal attire”, with 81 per cent depicting women and 2 per cent appearing to be under 18.
Far above that dispute, more than 6,000 Starlink satellites orbit the planet, routing internet traffic for rural households, ships and front lines. Together, Grok and Starlink form a snapshot of the present: communication and imagination outsourced to private infrastructure, then hurried back under public oversight once problems appear.
AI Images Under Broadcast Rules
British regulators stepped in after X users tagged Grok in photo comments with prompts like “put her in a bikini”. The tool obliged in many cases, including sexualising a 14-year-old Stranger Things actor and BBC presenters. Prime Minister Keir Starmer called it “disgusting” and said all options, including banning X from Britain, were on the table.
Ofcom responded by launching a formal investigation on 12 January under the Online Safety Act. The regulator warned X could face fines up to £18 million or 10 per cent of worldwide revenue, whichever is greater. If X refuses to comply, Ofcom can apply to courts for orders forcing internet service providers to block the platform.
On 15 January, X announced it would geoblock Grok’s ability to generate images of real people in revealing clothing in jurisdictions where illegal. The investigation remains ongoing. Technology Secretary Liz Kendall welcomed the move but insisted Ofcom would continue seeking answers about “what went wrong and what’s being done to fix it”.
Public broadcasters depend on trust. If viewers cannot distinguish live coverage from synthetic material pushed through the same app, confidence erodes quickly. Regulating that line late is better than ignoring it.
Satellites in War and Everyday Life
Starlink has grown from a technical experiment into a global service used in more than 100 countries. In 2024, the company reported several million subscribers and thousands of satellites in orbit, far ahead of rival constellations. Rural areas without fibre lines often rely on those terminals for schooling, banking and basic communication.
The same system plays a part in conflict. Ukrainian forces have used Starlink links for drones and field coordination, whilst reports from Gaza and other crises repeatedly mention satellite connectivity as a lifeline and a bargaining chip. Decisions taken in a company boardroom can alter conditions on the ground for soldiers and civilians.
That mix of civilian dependence and military relevance makes Starlink a strategic asset, even though it is formally a private service. Governments must decide how far to integrate such networks into defence planning without handing too much leverage to one supplier.
Regulators Late to the Table
Both Grok and Starlink emerged faster than law-makers could write new rules. Instead, authorities reach for existing frameworks: broadcasting codes for AI images, telecoms licences and competition law for satellite networks. The result is a patchwork of approvals, fines and public warnings.
Dame Chi Onwurah, chair of the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, warned that the Online Safety Act “was riddled with gaps – including its failure to explicitly regulate generative AI”. The Data Use and Access Act, passed in July 2025, includes provisions to ban deepfake imagery, but secondary legislation must still be passed before it takes effect.
Indonesia and Malaysia temporarily blocked Grok over the weekend of 11-12 January after finding it lacked effective guardrails. Indonesian Communication Minister Meutya Hafid said non-consensual sexual deepfakes represented “a serious violation of human rights, dignity and the safety of citizens in the digital space”.
For AI tools, Europe’s AI Act attempts to set categories and obligations, but real enforcement depends on national agencies with limited staff. Public servants face companies that can roll out features to hundreds of millions of users in a day.
From Backlash to Better Tools
Backlash against technology often starts with outrage: a harmful image, a battlefield leak, a rural region cut off after a contract dispute. The media cycle moves on, but the regulatory trace remains. Grok’s consent restrictions for UK users may influence how other platforms treat deepfakes in future. Questions asked of Starlink may shape public investment in alternative networks.
Innovation does not need to be treated as a threat. Satellite internet can connect remote villages; generative tools can help artists and educators. The problem arises when essential services grow around systems that only a handful of people can switch on or off.
Europe has the capacity to respond. It already invests in its own satellite plans and funds research on trustworthy AI. The harder task is cultural rather than technical: resisting the habit of embracing new infrastructure first and asking basic political questions later.
Starlink terminals on farm roofs and Grok images in news feeds remind citizens that power in the digital age often sits outside parliaments. If regulators manage to bring those systems under public rules without suffocating useful innovation, that would count as quiet progress. Failing to try would leave daily life ever more dependent on tools whose owners few voters could name.
Keep up with Daily Euro Times for more updates!
Read also:
Airbus’ Edge on Boeing is Innovation, Not Government Support
Musk’s X is Turning into an Empty Nest
Foreign Groups Launch Multi-Front AI Attack Against France
