Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 500 posts

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#141

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

skissane wrote: post #38
sneak wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they had backlash against using AI on devices they don’t own to report said devices to police for having illegal files on them. There was no technical measure to ensure that the devices being searched were only being searched for CSAM, as the system can be used to search for any type of images chosen by Apple or the state. (Also, with the advent of GenAI, CSAM has been redefined to include generated imagery that…

> Also, with the advent of GenAI, CSAM has been redefined to include generated imagery that does not contain any of {children, sex, abuse} It hasn’t been redefined. The legal definition of it in the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand has included computer generated imagery since at least the 1990s. The US Congress did the same thing in 1996, but the US Supreme Court ruled in the 2002 case of Ashcroft v Free Speech Co…

Thanks for the information. However I am unconvinced that SCOTUS got this right. I don’t think there should be a free speech exception for obscenity. If no other crime (like against a real child) is committed in creating the content, what makes it different from any other speech?

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#142

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #131
janderson215 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious of other perspectives and conclusions on this. Why do you think Facebook is the responsible party and not the purveyors of the content that caused them PTSD? From my perspective, Facebook hired people to prevent this content from reaching a wider audience. Thanks for any insight you can provide.

Maybe the solution is that Facebook shouldn't exist. It solves both the problem of distribution and the problem of moderation.

If others want to moderate why should these complainers get in the way? They are free to not take the job, which obviously involves looking at repulsive content so others don’t have to. Most people don't have a problem with social media existing or moderators having the job of a moderator.

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#143

Post by Eisenstein »

nradov wrote: post #127
narrator wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, these jobs are horrible. However, I do know from accidently encountering bad stuff on the internet that you want to be as far away from a modern battlefield as possible. It's just kind of ridiculous how people think war is like Call of Duty. One minute you're sitting in a trench, the next you're a pile of undifferentiated blood and guts. Same goes for car accidents and stuff. People really underestimate how frag…

I don't mean to trivialize traumatic experiences but I think many modern people, especially the pampered members of the professional-managerial class, have become too disconnected from reality. Anyone who has hunted or butchered animals is well aware of the fragility of life. This doesn't damage our concept of normal life.

What is it about partaking in or witnessing the killing of animals or humans that makes one more connected to reality?

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#144

Post by itake »

PittleyDunkin wrote: post #29
itake wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe.. apple had a lot of backlash using AI to detect CSAM.

I don't think the problem there is the AI aspect

My understanding was the FP risk. Everything was on device. People designed images that were FPs of real images.

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#145

Post by itake »

sneak wrote: post #15
itake wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe.. apple had a lot of backlash using AI to detect CSAM.

No, they had backlash against using AI on devices they don’t own to report said devices to police for having illegal files on them. There was no technical measure to ensure that the devices being searched were only being searched for CSAM, as the system can be used to search for any type of images chosen by Apple or the state. (Also, with the advent of GenAI, CSAM has been redefined to include generated imagery that…

My understanding was the FP risk. The hashes were computed on device, but the device would self-report to LEO if it detects a match.

People designed images that were FPs of real images. So apps like WhatsApp that auto-save images to photo albums could cause people a big headache if a contact shared a legal FP image.

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#146

Post by itake »

Zak wrote: post #32
threeseed wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. As opposed to running it on their servers like they do now. And it was only for iCloud synced photos.

There's a huge gap between "we will scan our servers for illegal content" and "your device will scan your photos for illegal content" no matter the context. The latter makes the user's device disloyal to its owner.

Apple is already categorizing content on your device. Maybe they don't report what categories you have. But I know if I search for "cat" it will show me pictures of cats on my phone.

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#147

Post by Eisenstein »

slothtrop wrote: post #124
sunaookami wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this just leads to more censorship without any option to appeal.

> without any option to appeal. Why would that be? Currently content is flagged and moderators decide whether to take it down. Using AI, it's easy conceive a process where some uploaded content is preflagged requiring an appeal (otherwise it's the same as before, a pair of human eyes automatically looking at uploaded material). Uploaders trying to publish rule-breaking content would not bother with an appeal that wou…

Because edge cases exist, and it isn't worth it for a company to hire enough staff to deal with them when one user with a problem, even if that problem is highly impactful to their life, just doesn't matter when the user is effectively the product and not the customer. Once the AI works well enough, the staff is gone and the cases where someone's business or reputation gets destroyed because there are no ways to appeal a wrong decision by a machine get ignored. And of course 'the computer won't let me' or 'I didn't make that decision' is a great way for no one to ever have to feel responsible for any harms caused by such a system.

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#148

Post by noduerme »

llm_trw wrote: post #116
noduerme wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your logic is backwards. The main reason for a culture to ban pedophilia is because it causes trauma in children . For thousands of years, cultures have progressed towards protecting children. This came from a natural sense of outrage in a majority of people, which became part of the culture. Not vice versa. In many of your comments, you seem to assume that people are only automatons who think and do exactly…

I'm now old enough to have seen people who treated homosexuals in the 1980s the same we treat pedophiles today start waving rainbow flags and calling the people they beat up for being gay in highschool Nazis. There maybe a few people with principles who stick with them. The majority will happily shove who ever they are told to in a gas chamber.

I'm not saying there aren't a lot of people who are natural conformists, who do whatever they're told to, and hate or love whatever the prevailing culture hates or loves. They may be a majority. And yes, a prevailing culture can take even the revulsion of murder out of people to some extent (although check out the state sanctioned degree of alcohol and drug use among SS officers and you'll see it's not quite so easy to make people do acts of murder and torture every day).

What I am saying is that the conformists don't drive the culture, they're just a blunt weapon of whoever is driving the culture. That weapon can be turned toward gay rights or toward burning people at the stake, but what changes a culture are the individuals with either a conscience or the individuals with wicked plans. Both of which exist outside the mainstream in any time and place.

Maybe another way of saying this is that I think most people are capable of murder and most people are capable of empathy (and therefore trauma) with someone being tortured, but primarily they're concerned with being a good guy. What throws the arc of history towards a higher morality is that maybe >0% of people naturally need to perceive themselves as "good" by defending life and the dignity and humanity of other people, to the extent that needing to be a good person overrides their cultural programming. And those are not the only people who change a culture, but 51% of the time they change it for the better instead of worse.

That's just my view on it.

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#149

Post by AnarchismIsCool »

Eisenstein wrote: post #143
nradov wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to trivialize traumatic experiences but I think many modern people, especially the pampered members of the professional-managerial class, have become too disconnected from reality. Anyone who has hunted or butchered animals is well aware of the fragility of life. This doesn't damage our concept of normal life.

What is it about partaking in or witnessing the killing of animals or humans that makes one more connected to reality?

Lots of people who spend time working with livestock on a farm describe a certain acceptance and understanding of death that most modern people have lost.

Re: More than 140 Kenya Facebook moderators sue after diagnoses of PTSD

#150

Post by jsheroes »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #70
thrance wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exploited people of the world should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work harder to get what they want, like you did?

They aren’t exploited. They’re paid money in return for viewing and filtering content for others. They could not apply or decline the offer and look at other jobs. The availability of this job doesn’t change the rest of their employment options. But it’s pretty clear what this job is. If it was just looking at friendly content, it wouldn’t need to exist.

[dead]
Post reply on HN