This is what happens when you buy a camera from the "they trust me, dumb fucks" guy and put it on your face.
But aren't the users wearing glasses while nude or having sex dumb fucks though?
[deleted]
Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
391–400 of 463 posts
Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> 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. 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…
> With the help of AI, small players can do a better job at removing CSAM.
Chicken/egg. How do you expect that AI to be able to detect CSAM without appropriate training, which requires appropriately classified training data?
Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
If anything they should be banned in private spaces, like if someone wearing them enters someone's home etc. There is no expectation of privacy in public.
While technically "there is no expectation of privacy in public space." I do see a categorical difference between creating a stored, AI processed record of random people and "people can see what you do while you're out and about". That argument was valid before the mass automation we see now, but now it is more a fig leaf than an argument. I do not remember every single person I see on the street. What makes it Ok fo…
We're talking about exactly this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRELLH86Edo
Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Server moderators should be legally responsible for content on their server. So if you want to send someone to jail, just talk your way into joining their server, upload some illegal content, and report them for it? > Not many moderators will have to look at CSAM because the structure of the system makes is unappealing to even try sharing CSAM, knowing you will be immediately blocked. Why would someone join a serve…
right, and you have other users on fediverse that notice that server leaking, and if the content is bad enough, report the service to an authority. Having all of the pedophiles and other creeps on a tiny subset of servers, isloated islands of them; well, that ought make enforcement easier. It also makes it relatively easy to avoid, as server admins share blocklists. I know a dozen servers offhand that i'd block if i…
> well, that ought make enforcement easier.
Because of course the people congregating to do illegal stuff online are going to do it in your jurisdiction where prosecution is guaranteed
Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#395Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
> or not
So you don't care that you're wrong? Not a surprise coming from someone handwaving away the mess Meta made.
What your opponent is saying is, "there are mutually exclusive A and B". A being widespread CSAM and B being somebody need to look at CSAM to remove it.
Can you elaborate on what exactly is wrong there? Do you see the third alternative C and it's not the "whole choice"? Or are you saying A or B do not exist and therefore there's no choice? Please name C, or tell us why A or B don't exist (or aren't acceptable), or explain your view that doesn't fit into these options.
Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
> or not
So you don't care that you're wrong? Not a surprise coming from someone handwaving away the mess Meta made.
In what regard is it incorrect that a single, larger entity that is at least notionally committed to avoiding the existence of any specific type of content on their platform is more likely to successfully avoid the existence of that type of content on their platform than smaller entities with less resources?
Now consider that some of those smaller entities might not be even notionally interested in avoiding the existence of that specific type of content on their platform, and are small enough for regulators to be unaware of its existence?
Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How else do you want companies to remove and prevent CSAM? Different situation. Facebook has to do CSAM moderation because it's a publishing platform. People will post CSAM on facebook, so they must do moderation. And "just don't have facebook" isn't a solution because every publication of any sort has to deal with this problem; Any newspaper accepting mail has this problem. (Albeit to a much more scaled down versi…
> traumatizing contract workers for $2-3 an hour) Is there an hourly rate at which this should be acceptable?
Rookie police officers in my country are paid 2500 euro per month and they have to deal with the underbelly of society.
They have access to better counselling and are ostensibly trained for the job. But there are still suicides.
Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Fun" bonus fact: This isn't the first time Sama (the outsourcing company) has had these problems. OpenAI had them classify CSAM, so Sama fired them as a client back in 2022. https://time.com/6247678/openai-chatgpt-kenya-workers/ We're 4 years on, 3 years since that report broke. Not a single thing has improved about how tech companies operate.
How else do you want companies to remove and prevent CSAM? It seems like you must have some human involvement to train and monitor. It’s a terrible job, I wouldn’t want to do it, but someone needs to. Perhaps one day, AI will be accurate enough to not need it, but even then you need someone to process complaints and waivers (like someone’s home photos being inaccurately flagged).
I agree that there’s no good way to do this other than like… no user generated content ever or just ban everyone for their baby pics and etc….and nobody can post them.
Granted the latter is kinda happening distantly on YouTube where you can’t talk about “ suicide “ so everyone self censors…
Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you don't care that you're wrong? Not a surprise coming from someone handwaving away the mess Meta made.
What your opponent is saying is, "there are mutually exclusive A and B". A being widespread CSAM and B being somebody need to look at CSAM to remove it. Can you elaborate on what exactly is wrong there? Do you see the third alternative C and it's not the "whole choice"? Or are you saying A or B do not exist and therefore there's no choice? Please name C, or tell us why A or B don't exist (or aren't acceptable), or ex…
Some people are not okay with actively facilitating harm to people, even if inaction results in harm to other people. See: the trolley problem. This is totally okay, but the point made above is that
>That's a tradeoff you can choose to make
is not correct: It is a tradeoff that one specific person can choose to make, but not one that I or we can choose to make, because we don't control facebook. Mark Zuckerberg controls facebook. He alone can choose to make that tradeoff, or not, on behalf of society.