Nucleo’s investigation identified accounts with thousands of followers with illegal behavior that Meta’s security systems were unable to identify; after contact, the company acknowledged the problem and removed the accounts

  • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Please, please, please abandon these platforms. Just stop using them. There’s a cycle to these things and once they are past the due date all that’s left is rotten. It really is as simple as stop using their platform.

  • General_Effort@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 minutes ago

    When I saw this, 2 questions came to mind: How come that this isn’t immediately reported? Why would anyone upload illegal material to a platform that tracks as thoroughly as Meta’s do?

    The answer is:

    All of those accounts followed the same visual pattern: blonde characters with voluptuous bodies and ample breasts, blue eyes, and childlike faces.

    The 1 question that came to mind upon reading this is: What?

  • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Meta doesn’t care about AI generated content. There are thousands of fake accounts with varying quality of AI generated content and reporting them does exactly shit.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    8 hours ago

    after contact, the company acknowledged the problem and removed the accounts

    Meta is outsourcing content moderation to journalists.

  • Infynis@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    9 hours ago

    … Meta’s security systems were unable to identify…

    I think you mean incentivized to ignore

  • Aaron Doe@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Parents should get their kids to never touch anything “Meta” made or brought.

    But then again, them same parents are currently telling the world what their neighbours are doing, what they’re eating and how cute did “insert name here” look in their new school uniform. 🤦‍♂️

    • imnotafish@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      They are also providing Meta with free age progression training material when they upload those pictures of their kids each year on the first day of school

      • Aaron Doe@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Yeah without doubt we’re entering a weird and scary time with all this non-consensual AI training and data models.

        Especially with the amount of data Meta has across all its platforms.

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    IG is a total fascist shithole. I closed my “political” acct because all of the sponsored content was fascist trash: zionism, flat earthism, qanon, racist stuff, anti-vax, etc.

    Switched to Pixelfed and RSS… and Lemmy ofc.

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Child Sexual Abuse Material is abhorrent because children were literally abused to create it.

    AI generated content, though disgusting, is not even remotely on the same level.

    The moral panic around AI that leads to implying that these things are the same thing is absurd.

    Go after the people filming themselves literally gang raping toddlers, not the people typing forbidden words into an image generator.

    Don’t dilute the horror of the production CSAM by equating it to fake pictures.

    • suicidaleggroll@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Yes at a cursory glance that’s true. AI generated images don’t involve the abuse of children, that’s great. The problem is what the follow-on effects of this is. What’s to stop actual child abusers from just photoshopping a 6th finger onto their images and then claiming that it’s AI generated?

      AI image generation is getting absurdly good now, nearly indistinguishable from actual pictures. By the end of the year I suspect they will be truly indistinguishable. When that happens, how do you tell which images are AI generated and which are real? How do you know who is peddling real CP and who isn’t if AI-generated CP is legal?

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        8 hours ago

        What’s the follow on effect from making generated images illegal?

        Do you want your freedom to be at stake where the question before the Jury is “How old is this image of a person (that doesn’t exist?)”. “Is this fake person TOO child-like?”

        When that happens, how do you tell which images are AI generated and which are real? How do you know who is peddling real CP and who isn’t if AI-generated CP is legal?

        You won’t be able to tell, we can assume that this is a given.

        So the real question is:

        Who are you trying to arrest and put in jail and how are you going to write that difference into law so that innocent people are not harmed by the justice system?

        To me, the evil people are the ones harming actual children. Trying to blur the line between them and people who generate images is a morally confused position.

        There’s a clear distinction between the two groups and that distinction is that one group is harming people.

      • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        If pedophiles won’t be able to tell what’s real and what’s AI generated why risk jail to create the real ones?

    • Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      Although that’s true, such material can easily be used to groom children which is where I think the real danger lies.

      I really wish they had excluded children in the datasets.

      You can’t really put a stop to it anymore but I don’t think it should be something that’s normalized and accepted just because there isn’t a direct victim anymore. We are also talking about distribution here and not something being done in private at home.

        • Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Kids will do things if they see other children doing it in pictures and videos. It’s easier to normalize sexual behavior with cp then without.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            This sounds like you’re searching really hard for a reason to justify banning it. Pretty tenuous “what if” there.

            Like, a dildo could hypothetically be used to sexualize a child. Should we ban dildos?

            It’s so vague it could apply to anything.

            • Grimy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 hour ago

              Banning the tech, banning generated cp on the internet or banning it at home?

              I’m a big advocate of AI and don’t personally want any kind of banning or censorship of the tools.

              I don’t think it should be published on any kind of image sharing sites. I don’t hold people publishing it in high regard and I’m not against some kind of consequence. I generally view prison as unproductive though.

              At home, I’m not sure. People imo can do what they want behind closed doors. I don’t want any kind of surveillance but I don’t know how I would react if it got brought up at a trial, as a kind of proof if the allegations have something to do with that theme (child molestation).

              I also don’t think we need much of a reason to ban it on the web.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 hour ago

                It would probably make me distrust the prosecution, like if they’re bringing this up they must not have much to go on. Like every time a black man is shot by police they bring up that he smoked weed.

                I guess my main complaint is that it’s insane to view it as equivalent to real CP, and it’s harmful to waste any resources prosecuting it.

        • DNS@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Found the guy who watches said content. I hope you never plan on having kids.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Fuck off and die. Throwing accusations around like that, you should be ashamed of yourself.

            • DNS@discuss.online
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              51 minutes ago

              Lmao you said it makes no sense in regards to the material being used to groom children. I don’t need to hold your hand in that thought process on why it can potentially groom or foster that behavior. Go eat curb