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

Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 294 posts

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#241

Post by Telaneo »

carljungslabtek wrote: post #126
archildress wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our regulatory framework is so asleep at the wheel. It is as if there is this unpierceable veil if you operate as a corporate entity, as if multiple people's combined transgressions are less than a single person doing it.

Is it really asleep at the wheel or is it that decades of intense lobbying have crippled it? I mean of course it’s both, but I think it’s important to point out that it’s not just negligence, it’s more nefarious and selfish than that.

It's in an induced coma at the wheel.

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#242

Post by inigyou »

WorldMaker wrote: post #234
Spooky23 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. My uncle got taken by an “investment club” supposedly endorsed by Warren Buffet and run day to day by some real financial person. All communications were via WhatsApp. They started with real stock tips (which were pretty good actually!) and then did a pump and dump. See: https://www.cleuremissionfund.com/ I received a similar ad (mine was from the shark tank people), reported it and got a message similar…

Section 230 should have never applied to ads. Ads are a commercial relationship. Facebook and YouTube gets paid by these scammers so why would they want to accurately police them? The incentives are broken. Newspapers had to invent all sorts of ways to make sure that they had clear markers between ads, editorial content, and sponsored editorial content. Such things were enforced by lawsuits and a couple of Ad Bureaus…

Section 230 doesn't say the advertiser can't go to jail or Facebook doesn't have to tell the police who the advertiser is.

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#243

Post by inigyou »

phatfish wrote: post #194
michaelt wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The filter you want is named 'uBlock Origin' :)

Indeed, and the Revanced apk customisation on Android, and SmartTube on Google TV. I've not seen an ad from Youtube for probably 10+ years on my devices (since whenever Vanced made the apk customisations popular).

Didn't Revanced get replaced by Morphe?

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#244

Post by inigyou »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #186
yndoendo wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like three strikes and the CEO, top executives, and three primary share holders go to jail while forcing the company to dissolve seems to be the only solution to removing bad actors in corporate settings.

As long as we can also shoot tresspassers and thieves, you got a deal.

Okay, let's start now. Hey! This comment section is my property! Bang bang bang bang bang.

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#245

Post by inigyou »

mplewis wrote: post #78
Ajedi32 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As it should be. If the cost of fixing the problem is greater than the amount of harm the problem is actually causing to society, then it shouldn't be fixed. Set fine amounts accordingly. (Whether we actually do set fines this way is, of course, questionable. And probably this particular problem would get fixed even if there were no fine merely because of the reputational damage it's causing, but I'm speaking in gene…

you don't think one of the world's biggest media platforms disseminating CSAM is causing meaningful harm to society?

I think we should restrict the term CSAM to M created by CSA, not AI hallucinations.

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#246

Post by inigyou »

wredcoll wrote: post #156
callamdelaney wrote: post #152

Meta is still running ads that suggest violence against politicians, when reported they say it does not contravene their policies.

Politicians don't count.

LW politicians don't count. If there was an ad calling for violence against an RW politician it'd be taken down and the poster would go to jail.

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#248

Post by inigyou »

tbrownaw wrote: post #177
randyrand wrote: post #159

Non-specific terms are a pet peeve of mine in accusations. Is this new term broader than the old term of CP or is it the same? Why did we even switch?

> Is this new term broader than the old term of CP or is it the same? Why did we even switch? The purpose of the new term was to emphasize that producing it involves the actual abuse of an actual child. And then somehow it got applied to drawings and lately computer-generated stuff.

The purpose of the new term was virtue signalling by suggesting that it's somehow outside of the definition of the word "porn".

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#249

Post by kotaKat »

ryanjshaw wrote: post #135
craftkiller wrote: post #60

I've noticed on YouTube I see a lot of adult sexual ads. Things like home cleaning ads that have an unmistakable wood-grain image of fellatio. I've always wondered "how are these getting past the moderators?". I guess the answer is the obvious one: no one is moderating anything.

Google Play Store showed my child an ad of a bloody body on a bed for a murder mystery game. The game was rated 18+ and the account had my daughter’s correct single digit age. I reported the ad and a week later it was still there. I switched to Apple.

Apple is equally pointless.

They don't remove apps like Facebook or Twitter for displaying CSAM, but apparently ganked Telegram at the first single report of an extortionist trying to remove a public Telegram group because they posted CSAM in it.

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/telegram-sa...

It's only okay when the American companies get away with CSAM.

Re: Meta Ran Ads That Contained AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Imagery

#250

Post by anang »

thereisnospork wrote: post #211
tyleo wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your right! We should also reduce food safety requirements for McDonalds and other large restaurants. At their scale it’s just too hard to keep everything clean.

There was just an outbreak at Taco Bell - should we fine Yum! Brands out of existence. liquidate their assets and imprison the executives, like some people elsewhere in the discussion seem to be advocating for? Should we add a few billion dollars in operating costs in increased food safety regulations? The societally optimal amount of regulation will most likely not completely eliminate outbreaks, presuming diminishi…

If YUM! brands demonstrated a pattern of negligence that led to frequent food safety issues I think absolutely there should be severe consequences.

Nobody is advocating for a one strike you’re out policy, just that at some point there should be more severe consequences than a fine.

Post reply on HN