back to article Facebook's going to block revenge porn with AI. Or humans. Or both

Well, that's awkward. Facebook's head of global safety and CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday gave differing descriptions of the advertising network's just-launched "AI" powered “online safety” initiative. The idea is that if someone's intimate images are shared without permission as “revenge porn," the site's systems will be …

  1. mr. deadlift

    Bigger problems to worry about.

    I think maybe live kiddie rape might have been prioritized a little higher on their things-we-ought-to-stop-on-Facebook list. I'm still baffled this actually happed without some kind of flags at zucktown going off.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/04/03/second-juvenile-15-arrested-facebook-live-gang-rape/99999198/

  2. 101
    FAIL

    AI or BS?

    Call it AI, but in the end it's still one man's opinion converted to an app.

    And, FB must be one of the least trustworthy corporations in the world to be the judge of truth, smut or anything else.

  3. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

    "While we applaud the objective of the program, The Register is concerned about the process."

    Quite. What are the odds that in effect they'll just tag the person in the image (as a subset of the collected data that is supposed to remain for internal use only). Tagging as such comes bundled with its own set of problems already, and once something is out there and in FB's heap of data in any way it will never be private again.

  4. MNGrrrl
    Facepalm

    Real problems not found?

    Having solved all other problems, *uckerberg now sets his eyes on deleting 'revenge' smut? What about the flagrant abuse of minorities and a steadfast refusal to fix the problems with the 'real name' policy that led to so many drag queens, transgender people, and other marginalized groups being targeted with their automated reporting system and then booted off their system? Yeah, you've got a pile of new gender options on the signup page, but you canned the person responsible and then cancelled their account. Repeatedly. Anyone can use a bot to make a couple hundred fake accounts and then all set them to report another account and get it booted. It's all automation. Automated abuse.

    Artificial intelligence can't fix real stupidity.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "[...] we hope that the humans involved in making classification decisions are properly supported against the likely psychological trauma they might suffer."

    IIRC - in the early days of self-appointed IWF style organisations in the UK - it was suggested that unpaid Boy Scouts could be recruited to look for dubious pictures.

    1. tiggity Silver badge

      trauma

      You would hope that reporting allows different image classification, it's one level of potential psychological trauma for a person to vet "mainstream" images, another thing altogether for some other more dubious areas e.g. involving juveniles, non consensual activities etc.

      From similar vetting processes in other organisations, there's a short burnout time on those exposed to the worst images

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Shah ... and I'm going to invent a machine that will weave fog into an exciting range of clothing!

  7. Potemkine Silver badge

    "revenge"

    We shouldn't give the bastards doing this the benefice of calling their unspeakable behavior "revenge", it could suggest they could have been justified to do so.

    One has to find a better term than "revenge porn". I suggest "lynching porn" instead.

    1. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

      Re: "revenge"

      I don't see a problem: revenge doesn't imply a justification.

      I do see a problem with the proposal of "lynching" since it suggests the aggrieved party using Photoshop software to portray their victim getting lynched, which is more traumatic for everyone than "pictures of people with not enough clothes on which were meant to be private", which seems to be what we're actually discussing, as well as the other thing I just said perhaps.

      I also see a problem distinguishing the particular offending pictures of people with not enough clothes on from very widely freely available pictures of other people with not enough clothes on, including people who may, coincidentally or otherwise, look very like the people who don't want their own pictures with not enough clothes on to be circulated, but are different, consenting people.

      Well, I suppose that if I, an overweight fifty year old man, agree with you to pose for pictures on your Facebook in the guise of your ex-girlfriend with not enough clothes on, then it is liable to be humiliating to your ex-girlfriend, but I'm not sure exactly how illegal it should be. This is hypothetical: I'm not going to do it. No. Stop asking.

      Just cheer yourself up with some pictures of Sophia Loren in "The Millionairess", the film which inspired the rather pointed comedy show title "Peter Sellers Is Dead" (they changed it but kept the theme tune).

      1. Potemkine Silver badge

        Re: "revenge"

        "I don't see a problem: revenge doesn't imply a justification."

        How I get it, "revenge" is a reaction to an action presumed offensive: somebody seeking revenge considers having being victim of an aggressive behavior, revenge is a kind of justification.

        then it is liable to be humiliating to your ex-girlfriend, but I'm not sure exactly how illegal it should be.

        Revenge Porn can kill:

        Brazilian 17-Year-Old Commits Suicide After Revenge Porn Posted Online

        Italian prosecutor vows to arrest those who ‘incited’ Tiziana Cantone’s suicide

        'Revenge porn' victim considered suicide after ex-boyfriend posted naked picture of her on Facebook

        1. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

          "Revenge Porn can kill"

          I think that attitude is a big factor in this. First of all, I think there are at least two distinct dimensions of online "revenge" activity to consider, which can overlap; one is demeaning your victim on the internet to people who know them - or may meet them or harass them once you start the demeaning - and another is, as I say, pictures or video or audio of them with not enough clothes on, etc., that were meant to be private or to not exist at all, shown to everybody in the world.

          This story is specifically about the latter case, and is where I think that a victim should reflect that the public domain is already full of other representations of other people with not enough clothes on who either are not significantly distinguished from the victim from the point of view of most of the people in the world who would look at that sort of thing, or, frankly, are better at it than the victim, having more experience and/or a professional work ethic, so probably only the victim's friends would want to see, anyway. Or something like that.

          In at least one of the cases you specifically refer to, the victim and others involved are described as minors, meaning children, although the legal definition of that varies between jurisdictions and is often at odds with practice. Nevertheless, that's still 1000 times graver than "revenge" that merely embarrasses an adult person. Again, this particular story isn't about Facebook taking up a position against sexual images of children. I strongly suspect that's in the terms and conditions already.

  8. Cuddles

    To be fair

    "Zuckerberg said this laudable aim is going to be achieved by artificial intelligence; the head of global safety Antigone Davis says the heavy lifting will be done by “specially trained representatives from our community operations.”"

    Maybe their community operations section is staffed by AIs? It would certainly explain their general lack of ability to do anything much at all.

  9. Bucky 2

    Not sure I get revenge porn

    Let's say I hook up with a dude. We exchange photos or video ourselves or something.

    Then, okay, let's say it turns out he's a crazy person, and it ends up badly.

    I'm trying to get my head around what could possibly motivate me to post a photo of his wang as an act of revenge. Because he's not attractive? That would kind of reflect more on me than him, wouldn't it? Because he is attractive? Then I'm just advertising on his behalf.

    Maybe if he's a politician and trying to put on airs like he doesn't even have a dick, and even if he did, he'd only use it to pee with....?

    1. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

      Re: Not sure I get revenge porn

      It's alien to me, but as far as I can see, "revenge porn" isn't just a form of aesthetic criticism, as you seem to have in mind. It is to embarrass and harass the victim. So you send pictures to his mother. To his boss. His work colleagues. And with his e-mail address or phone number or home address. And you have leaflets posted in his neighbourhood. And then people who apparently can think of nothing better to do with their time will do the harassing for you. A favour which you are expected to return by giving of your free time to harass other people's victims in the same way.

      Mind you, if all you have to do this with is a picture of his penis, most people are going to say "It's no one I know".

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

Other stories you might like