Judge denies xAI’s request to block Minnesota ban on ‘nudify’ apps 32%

By Anthony Ha72%

8/1/2026, 1:26:04 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Anecdotal, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 28.6% saturation with 60 hits. Analysis detected 340 faulty-reasoning hits from 210 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 35.5% and a BS Rank of 32% (18,082 of 26,281 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 68.80% of the article peer group.

Despite a lawsuit from xAI, a Minnesota ban on apps that allow users to “nudify” images can move forward, according to NBC News. 
U.S. 
District Judge Donovan Frank’s ruling focused as much on the timing of xAI’s lawsuit as on the substance of the law itself. 
Frank wrote that xAI filed its request for a temporary restraining order “on July 29, 2026, nearly three months after the law was signed, and only three days before the law is set to take effect” on August 1. 
“Such a delay in bringing the action and the motion suggests that harm is not immediate,” Frank said. 
This isn’t the end of xAI’s lawsuit against the ban; it only means that the law can take effect while the lawsuit proceeds. 
In the suit, xAI argued that the ban  the first of its kind in the United States  is “overinclusive” and that “there are far less restrictive alternatives that function to achieve the same ends.” 
Earlier this year, users of Elon Musk’s social media platform X (both X and xAI, are now part of SpaceX) used xAI’s Grok chatbot to flood the platform with non-consensual sexualized images, leading to investigations and bans. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.6%Anthony Ha: 3.8%TechCrunch: 2.8%Confirmation Bias8.6%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.0%TechCrunch: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 28.6%Anthony Ha: 4.5%TechCrunch: 3.3%Availability Heuristic28.6%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.0%TechCrunch: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.9%TechCrunch: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 2.1%TechCrunch: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 15.7%Anthony Ha: 4.9%TechCrunch: 4.5%Framing Effect15.7%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.0%TechCrunch: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.4%TechCrunch: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.0%Anthony Ha: 2.9%TechCrunch: 4.6%Optimism Bias11.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 2.1%TechCrunch: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 17.6%Anthony Ha: 6.8%TechCrunch: 4.9%Negativity Bias17.6%This article: 17.1%Anthony Ha: 2.5%TechCrunch: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias17.1%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.6%TechCrunch: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.3%TechCrunch: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.5%TechCrunch: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.5%TechCrunch: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.0%TechCrunch: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.7%TechCrunch: 2.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.2%TechCrunch: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.2%TechCrunch: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.5%TechCrunch: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 3.2%TechCrunch: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 2.6%TechCrunch: 3.9%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 11.0%Anthony Ha: 3.7%TechCrunch: 1.7%False Dilemma11.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.3%TechCrunch: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.2%TechCrunch: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 17.6%Anthony Ha: 10.4%TechCrunch: 5.6%Hasty Generalization17.6%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.6%TechCrunch: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.2%TechCrunch: 1.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 3.5%TechCrunch: 2.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.4%TechCrunch: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 8.6%Anthony Ha: 3.4%TechCrunch: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.6%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.6%TechCrunch: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.0%TechCrunch: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.1%TechCrunch: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.5%TechCrunch: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 17.6%Anthony Ha: 4.1%TechCrunch: 2.2%Anecdotal17.6%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.1%TechCrunch: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.2%TechCrunch: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.4%TechCrunch: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.3%TechCrunch: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.6%Anthony Ha: 2.3%TechCrunch: 1.7%Unattributed Quote8.6%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.0%TechCrunch: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 4.7%TechCrunch: 4.0%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.2%TechCrunch: 0.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.0%TechCrunch: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 0.6%TechCrunch: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony Ha: 1.3%TechCrunch: 4.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

210 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers44%attributed speech117writer words
Selected voice

xAI

100%flagged-word coverage
36 attributed words39% of attributed speech99% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.