back to article Facebook regrets asking whether it's OK to let adult men ask underage girls for smut pix

Facebook has apologized for sending out a survey to find out how the social network should respond when adult men ask teenaged girls for sexually explicit images. The survey, which went out to an undisclosed number of users of the social network over the weekend, posed this question: In thinking about an ideal world where …

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

A,B,C,D? Surely the answer is always E:

As long as Zuk always makes money off it, then its ok:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/02/facebook-executive-advertising-data-comment

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/02/facebook-surveillance-tech-ethics

big_D
Silver badge
Childcatcher

Re: A,B,C,D? Surely the answer is always E:

I miss the option about castrating the adult male and then informing the police... :-S

Bernard M. Orwell
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: A,B,C,D? Surely the answer is always E:

"I miss the option about castrating the adult male and then informing the police... "

...That you have committed an act of grievous bodily harm. Good of you to hand yourself in.

...unless of course you were unaware that you can't commit an act of violence based on a suspicion that the person you just attacked might have committed a crime and then expect the police to say "good job, citizen! Saved us all the trouble there!".

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: A,B,C,D? Surely the answer is always E:

...unless of course you were unaware that you can't commit an act of violence based on a suspicion that the person you just attacked might have committed a crime and then expect the police to say "good job, citizen! Saved us all the trouble there!".

Although there are far too many (verified) reports that if you wear a similar uniform that this is pretty much the response.

I ain't Spartacus
Gold badge
Devil

Re: A,B,C,D? Surely the answer is always E:

...unless of course you were unaware that you can't commit an act of violence based on a suspicion that the person you just attacked might have committed a crime

Dredd wasn't a documentary?

mosw

Re: A,B,C,D? Surely the answer is always E:

Just answer it honestly. FB can compile a comprehensive list of users that did not answer with C ("This content should not be allowed on Facebook ..."). Now they only have to filter/censor the future posts from those users. Much more cost effective that way.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

This is what happens...

When you put Algos in charge. Even the staff behave like bots. They say Algos are the future of everything: No healthcare / loan / drivers-license unless Mr Algo agrees etc... Who knows, maybe Musk / Hawking are right!

John Brown (no body)
Silver badge

Re: This is what happens...

I was thinking it was run by a bunch of college kids who have never/will never grow up due to living in a bubble.

Mark 85
Silver badge

I guess what some say is true then.

The world really is run by idiots.. rich idiots but idiots none the less.

CrazyOldCatMan
Silver badge

Re: I guess what some say is true then.

You seem to have misspelt "sociopaths"..

ThatOne
Bronze badge
Coat

> Missing is any acknowledgement that soliciting sexual imagery from minors is a crime in many countries

But the question is about the sovereign realm of Facebook, not some odd country out there...

Jason Bloomberg
Silver badge
Coat

My understanding is that the questionnaire was presented in terms of; if YOU could set the rules, what would they be?

That doesn't demand any consideration of what real world laws are, should be, or what the rest of society may think.

To me it isn't much different to asking if people think euthanasia should be legal in places where it currently isn't, asking whether drivers should be allowed to drive at 100 MPH when the current limit it 70, should be allowed gun ownership when presently banned.

We only have societal norms by collectively agreeing what those norms should be and set laws against those. Once set we expect everyone to abide by them. But that doesn't preclude anyone from disagreeing with them.

The one with the Voltaire first edition in the pocket ->

Bernard M. Orwell
Silver badge

"That doesn't demand any consideration of what real world laws are, should be, or what the rest of society may think."

Ah, thanks heavens for a little Voltaire! I think you may be shouting into the wind with society as a whole if you intend to lean on Kants Categorical Imperative, however, as no one thinks like that anymore. it's all "me, me, me" and "I want" or "I don't like". Glance down this forum; "I want to castrate him", "I want to ban facebook", "I don't like it, so you can't have it.". People just don't realise that if they got their way, so would everyone else and before you know it, we're all screwed out of something we value or want.

If you aren't willing for the ethical rule you claim to be following to be applied equally to everyone - including you - then that rule is not a valid moral rule. You can't claim that something is a valid moral rule and make an exception for yourselves, or arbitrarily for others of your choice; those who agree with you, for instance.

Nope, the crowd says non-consequentialism rules, and as we all know in this day and age, the crowd is loud....I mean right...sorry.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

how would "the real internet" handle the following

a private message in which an adult man asks a 14 year old girl for sexual pictures.

Adult man: Can I haz your nude?

14 year old girl: Here you go. [Sent her collection of manliest man-on-man action nude pictures]

Adult man: OMFG, ********** [Adult man disconnect from FB]

14 year old girl: [trollface]

(I guess FB could start making this an option on FB for all 14 year old girls. Just don't expect any unintended consequences. /trollface)

I ain't Spartacus
Gold badge
Devil

Re: how would "the real internet" handle the following

I thought all the girls on the internet were either 14 year-old boys or FBI Agents...

Or as the saying goes, "On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog."

Voidstorm
Joke

Re: how would "the real internet" handle the following

Closely followed by :

[PC Plod] *Takes Girl's witness statement after enraged Dad calls PC Plod about grooming male*

[PC Plod] *Arrests 14yo girl for Transmission of Obscene Imagery*

[Girl] *gets permanent criminal record and a lifelong membership to sex offender registry.*

Unfortnately, under a draconian interpretation of a lot of laws, this is what can actually happen in the above hypothetical scenario, because said laws do not allow prosecutorial or judicial discretion.

Anybody who expects adult cognisance from a kid... well, how sensible is that, exactly?

I wish I was kidding. :/

bombastic bob
Silver badge
Alert

Re: how would "the real internet" handle the following

"14 year old girl: [trollface]"

because, as we all know, when someone online claims to be a 14 year old girl, it's really a 45 year old male living in his mom's basement.

Asking for underage pr0n: creepy

Sending the underage pr0n (of herself): criminal

who's really taking the risk, here?

Bernard M. Orwell
Silver badge

Re: how would "the real internet" handle the following

"Asking for underage pr0n: creepy"

Actually, also illegal. Counts as grooming and, under UK extreme pornography laws, if you do get sent something along those lines it counts as "Making an image of" which is as near as makes no difference an offence of strict liability. This means that there is almost no defence that a court is required to take into account and that 'mens rea' (the intention to commit a crime) doesn't have to be proven. In fact, there are only three valid defences: I haven't seen these images and didn't know they existed (best of luck proving that if they are on your phone/PC), I didn't ask for these images (best of luck proving that when you've solicited such things online), or they are pictures of my children intended to be sent to my spouse (I'm sure she will be impressed being used as an alibi for your habits).

Here's the law:

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/indecent-images-children-iioc

Mitoo Bobsworth

Fixed it for you.

In thinking about an ideal world where you could set Facebook's policies, how would you handle the following: Someone posts an image of Mark Zuckerberg screwing a chicken.

• This content should be allowed on Facebook, and I would not mind seeing it.

• This content should be allowed on Facebook, and I would not mind seeing it.

• This content should be allowed on Facebook, and I would not mind seeing it.

• This content should be allowed on Facebook, and I would not mind seeing it.

Ole Juul
Silver badge

Re: Fixed it for you.

I think you missed one.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Fixed it for you.

Was there a road involved?

John G Imrie
Silver badge
Joke

Re: Fixed it for you.

At least, the truth of the KFC chicken shortage.

davidp231

Re: Fixed it for you.

ZCK.... They discovered out secret!

Mitoo Bobsworth

Re: Fixed it for you.

Ole Juul

• This content should be allowed on Facebook, and I would pay to see it, cackle with glee & post it to everyone I know.

P. Lee
Silver badge

What is “a politically divisive ad”?

Come on, I want an example.

Or indeed, what is a political but non-divisive ad, and why would you run it?

Missing Semicolon
Silver badge
Happy

Re: What is “a politically divisive ad”?

An ad for a political party you don't support.

"political but non-divisive ad": An advert for the Democratic Party (or Labour in the UK).

andyp-random-number

We're not paid to think.

...a clear case of our job is to come up with survey questions but not to think about what we have written.

A bit like writing a book with no proof reading

Teiwaz
Silver badge

Re: We're not paid to think.

A bit like writing a book with no proof reading

Nah, proof reading is only for correcting a few errors, no amount of proof reading can fix braindead or drug-induced jibberish like any corporate statement, political manifesto or comment by amanfrommars.

I am reminded of an exchange between Peter Griffin and Brian (Family Guy)

Brian : 'Do you lisiten to everything you say?'

Peter : 'I phase in and out.'

CrazyOldCatMan
Silver badge

Re: We're not paid to think.

jibberish like any corporate statement, political manifesto or comment by amanfrommars

Oi - leave amfm out of this. I seem him/her/it/gistself as somewhat akin to the cryptic crosswords that I sometimes try (and fail) to do.

Easy if you understand the logic (!) that generates them. Maybe one day we'll understand.

As to the others - complete gibberish from start to finish. They have as much connection to reality as a badly-written tabletop RPG that was originally written in Cantonese and auto-translated by Google.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

The good old "seen to be doing something but not actually doing anything" play.

Add a button called "Report to local law enforcement" for messages. Give local law enforcement the ability to get all information on a user including IP address (yes I know this can be spoofed), using the button also blocks the person, if more then two people block them then kick them off the site completely also blocking the IP address. That'll make them think twice in making these requests or at least make it difficult. Then again that's a lot of ad revenue they would lose.

Solarflare

Splendid idea, right up until about 5 seconds after implimentation when people start using it to bully other users (kids, for example), people who disagree in debates use it to silence their opposition, people do it for a laugh because it's easy and "law enforcement" (which one do all these reports even go to??) now have a few hundred million reports to sift through.

But other than that, top notch idea.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

I thought it would be obvious that those that abuse it also get banned.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

I think I'll add, alright smart arse what do you suggest? Shall we just leave it as it is and allow people to proposition young girls for pictures and who knows what? So what if it's abused? It's better than the current system of absolutely f*ck all but a quick survey. It's all well and good begin a smart arse but when you don't offer an alternative you are just being a smart arse for smart arse sake.

Make it a criminal offence to file a false report, See how many they get then.

's water music
Silver badge

Make it a criminal offence to file a false report, See how many they get then.

1. Even simpler, just make it a criminal offence to request nudes from underage girls

2. ????

3. then see how many people try it.

simples

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

It is a criminal offence already but people have no easy way of reporting it, can't be bothered or the police don't do anything about it.

If you have a system in place to deal with it then at least something gets done and people get held accountable for their actions or inaction.

Facebook get away with murder (figure of speech but they literally have allowed murders to be streamed) in the name of profit and governments won't legislate to stop it. The Germans are making a start with the 24 hour terrorist post removal fines and it's about time all governments forced them to employ people to protect users and address illegal content and actions. This isn't just Facebook they all need a sharp kick up the arse.

Teiwaz
Silver badge

optimistic, naive even.

If you have a system in place to deal with it then at least something gets done and people get held accountable for their actions or inaction.

Most corporations put a system in place so that things don't get done (seemingly)...

When have you heard the phrase 'We are putting a process in place....' and seen an excellent and working response to a problem.

May as well form a committee or put together a working group....

werdsmith
Silver badge

Everybody who continues to use Faecebook contributes to the ongoing existence of this repulsive blight.

Get rid of it. 100% of the things that you use it for can be done better another way if you are not lazy and do it properly.

handleoclast
Silver badge

Make it a criminal offence to file a false report, See how many they get then.

It is a criminal offence to file a false DMCA claim to take down a youtube video you dislike (by filing a DMCA you are claiming, under penalty of perjury that your copyright has been violated). Guess how often false DMCA claims are filed on youtube... It seems to be a favourite pass time of hard-of-thinking religious people to file false DMCAs against atheist videos which point out the contradictions/flaws in their religious beliefs.

As one US president (no, not Dubya or Trump) was surprised to learn, 50% of the population are of below-average intelligence. Adolescents are known to be less capable of resisting the urge to make impulsive actions because they have yet to gain the experience to cause them to apply rational thought before acting. So, "see how many they get then"? Fucking shitloads.

John Brown (no body)
Silver badge
Facepalm

"Add a button called "Report to local law enforcement" for messages. Give local law enforcement the ability to get all information on a user including IP address (yes I know this can be spoofed), using the button also blocks the person, if more then two people block them then kick them off the site completely also blocking the IP address."

SaaS? SWATting as a Service?

John Brown (no body)
Silver badge

Re: optimistic, naive even.

"May as well form a committee or put together a working group...."

Are you sure? Maybe we better organise a meeting to discuss that?

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: optimistic, naive even.

@Teiwaz

You're probably right but inaction at this point is becoming less of an option. Especially so when the content starts to swing elections.

mosw

"1. Even simpler, just make it a criminal offence to request nudes from underage girls"

Even even simpler:

1 Create a survey to find out which users think it is OK to request nudes from underage girls.

2 Send list to local authorities.

Carpet Deal 'em
Trollface

"The Germans are making a start with the 24 hour terrorist post removal fines and it's about time all governments forced them to employ people to protect users and address illegal content and actions."

If we're talking about forcing Facebook to take down posts, things could get fiddly before too long: right now there's a lawsuit aiming to get Twitter declared a public forum under California law - and almost anybody's allowed a soapbox in a Californian public forum. Now Facebook isn't Twitter, but Twitter is the social network your social network could smell like and it's almost certain they'll be held to the same standard.

Blockchain commentard
Facepalm

New survey

How should Facebook react when being a dumb arse?

a. Carry on as before, they can't help themselves.

Dan 55
Silver badge
Devil

Billions of dollars a year

Is still not enough to afford a moral compass, it seems.

This post has been deleted by its author

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Billions of dollars a year

those billions of dollars mean you don't need a moral compass ... you know where you're going already ...

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Facebook will never change

It makes billions from advertising and selling you as the commodity. It has deep pockets and big lawyers and sets the rules it plays by.

phuzz
Silver badge
Facepalm

"a crime in many countries, including the US"

Is this the same US where (in some states) there's no lower limit of the age of marriage, as long as you can find a judge to approve it?

adam payne
Silver badge

I would hope the vast majority of the community would say no not ever.

"We run surveys to understand how the community thinks about how we set policies," said Rosen via Twitter. "But this kind of activity is and will always be completely unacceptable on FB. We regularly work with authorities if identified. It shouldn't have been part of this survey. That was a mistake."

Another mistake in a long line of them.

Let me guess it was all automated?

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018