Anthony Albanese condemned X’s AI chatbot Grok generation of sexualised images of women and children as “abhorrent”, but don’t expect the prime minister – or seemingly any politician in Australia – to stop using the site any time soon.

Albanese condemned the use of generative AI to exploit or sexualise people without their consent, saying on Saturday that Australians deserved better. He added that the online safety regulator would look into it.

Albanese’s X account then posted a video from the same press conference on X. People in the replies attempted to prompt Grok to make an image of the prime minister in a bikini.

Grok was disabled for image generation for non-paying users on X last week after research revealed by the Guardian found it had been used to create pornographic videos of women without their consent, as well as images of women being shot and killed.

Searching on X, it is easy to quickly find photos of Australian politicians, including the prime minister, created using Grok – for example multiple politicians stripping down to reveal a bikini, or dressed up in a burkini.

Regulators across the world, including in Australia, are now investigating Grok, with fines and the potential blocking of Grok or X being touted as possible outcomes. Some countries have reportedly blocked access to the chatbot in the meantime.

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News email}

In Australia, the eSafety commissioner has sent a “please explain” letter, that could ultimately lead to fines being sought from the federal court, but given X’s long history in challenging regulatory action from eSafety, that could take years.

Nearly three years since Elon Musk took over X, it is unclear what – if anything – the platform can do to make people who keep posting on there decide to finally leave.

Those who saw it become an increasingly toxic platform, most recently last year with the MechaHitler incident, or the massive amount of misinformation on the platform after the Bondi terror attack, have already fled to other platforms like Bluesky or Threads.

Those who remain on X may be sympathetic to Musk’s views and how he has shifted what people see on the platform, or are addicted to the engagement they get and are worried it would be difficult to replicate elsewhere.

Despite the outrage and protestation from the prime minister, politicians aren’t voting with their feet and moving elsewhere.

Guardian Australia contacted a number of Australian politicians – including those who had posted about the Grok issue – to ask whether they would continue to post on the site.

Many said they need to go where people are.

Another response was that journalists also still post there – somewhat of a chicken or the egg conundrum.

Less clear is why government agencies, emergency services and others still post on X. The shift in the algorithm under Musk to reward the most divisive content in the feed should surely highlight that it is less useful in a breaking news situation where information needs to travel fast.

There is one stand out. The account of the office of the eSafety commissioner, and the commissioner herself, Julie Inman Grant, quietly ceased posting on X in August last year.

eSafety has been embroiled in legal battles with X over the past few years and has been a target of Musk’s and his supporters on the platform, so her absence is not that surprising. But if Australia’s online safety regulator finds X to be an unsafe place, what does that say for the rest of us?

The indifference to X is not limited to politicians. Apple and Google have so far remained silent on why X remains in their app stores while hosting such content. Those of us with a long memory will recall when Apple hastily forced Tumblr to remove all consenting adult content from its platform or face being kicked off the app store.

Perhaps the antisemitism royal commission should examine the role of social media, after a report found high levels of antisemitic posts on X.

At the time of the Center for Countering Digital Hate report, X posted that it was “dedicated to fighting abuse driven by hate, bias, or intolerance – especially when it aims to silence voices”.

If eSafety’s investigation leads to some sort of penalty being sought, the regulator could take a stronger response and use its power to order app stores to remove the app for hosting illegal content.

Until then it seems there’s not much more than terse words for Grok in Australia.