381–390 of 463 posts
Not sure which is worse here - that Meta are recording video from customers' smart glasses, or that they are firing people who talk about it.
Can I squeeze in the just a teeny tiny bit of… why the hell are you wearing an internet camera on you while naked and/or having sex? … although I really extend that to why are you wearing an internet connected camera that is obviously going to be monitored by Meta.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why generative? Or has it been decided that only generative models are “AI”?
What kind of model "reproduce"s things later for profit that is not generative?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A fair point. But it still seems reasonable that only about 1% of suspect posts lead to a formal inquiry. Doesn’t mean they aren’t taking the report into account. You have to figure that they already have leads on most of them.
Do we have to figure that? Do we really have to give the benefit of the doubt to the agency that was literally running one of the largest CSAM distribution outlets in the world for years as a honeypot?
Of course, that was 60 years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do we have to figure that? Do we really have to give the benefit of the doubt to the agency that was literally running one of the largest CSAM distribution outlets in the world for years as a honeypot?
If you want ro argue that the FBI is a fundamentally flawed agency that on balance is a net negative, I won’t fight you that hard. But during the civil rights struggle, they were the only force that could be trusted at all. Of course, that was 60 years ago.
Eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
I guess "other forces were worse" can certainly be true, but then how low are we holding the bar?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a lot of lawful, useful, medical or educational content Like what? It’s all there on Wikipedia, and for all of Wiki’s faults, I have trouble imagining what kind of useful, educational, medical information you will find on social media that is better than that.
You don't necessarily reach the same population and some people, believe it or not, are afraid, unable or have difficulties to read yet are online.
Meta said the contracting "did not meet (meta's) standards". I am sure that is true. meta's "standard" is not to reveal the illegal, immoral, unethical things meta does. No matter what the harm. Maybe a company with those standards should not get our business. Oops, no wait, maybe they mean the Friedman Doctrine standards? In that case they are entitled to do any and every thing to make a profit. No matter what the h…
I used to work for Meta. I quit largely because of intense frustrations with the company. Meta has made a lot of mistakes, overlooked a lot of harms, and made a lot of short-sighted, selfish choices. Many things about the world are worse than they could be because of choices Meta has made. So that when I say that they really do have a zero tolerance policy for anyone using their internal systems to violate user priva…
The man is without any redeeming qualities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want ro argue that the FBI is a fundamentally flawed agency that on balance is a net negative, I won’t fight you that hard. But during the civil rights struggle, they were the only force that could be trusted at all. Of course, that was 60 years ago.
Wasn't the FBI doing some pretty questionable stuff with regards to MLK during said civil rights movement? Eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO I guess "other forces were worse" can certainly be true, but then how low are we holding the bar?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CSAM exists on social media because they are so large that it's not possible to moderate them effectively. To me this is a a no-go. If a business is so large that it cannot respect laws, it needs to be shut down. The correct way to organize social media is in federated way. Each server only holds on average a few hundred or few thousand people. Server moderators should be legally responsible for content on their serv…
Having tens of thousands of decentralized, independently moderated servers would result in an order of magnitude more CSAM being shared than having a few oligopolies. The abusers just have to find the weakest link, and that weakest link will have fewer resources than multi trillion dollar companies. You would also likely not hear many news stories about it, because they won't have the expertise to even detect it. Tha…
It doesn't matter how many are shared but how many are viewed. On a small server community policing works just fine, bad actors are easier and faster to block and to top it off, the smaller reach of each server makes it unprofitable to target multiple serves, fish for their weak points. etc - the dirty jobs become unprofitable which is what matters most.
With the help of AI, small players can do a better job at removing CSAM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It certainly is not.
Yeah, I agree with you. Of course, it’s not Meta’s blame that the CSAM actually exists, but calling the problem of filtering it extremely difficult at Meta’s scale is a problem that is easily solvable but fundamentally requires changing how the platform works, and would likely require a lot more money to be spent.