this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
908 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

60012 readers
2165 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Instagram is profiting from several ads that invite people to create nonconsensual nude images with AI image generation apps, once again showing that some of the most harmful applications of AI tools are not hidden on the dark corners of the internet, but are actively promoted to users by social media companies unable or unwilling to enforce their policies about who can buy ads on their platforms.

While parent company Meta’s Ad Library, which archives ads on its platforms, who paid for them, and where and when they were posted, shows that the company has taken down several of these ads previously, many ads that explicitly invited users to create nudes and some ad buyers were up until I reached out to Meta for comment. Some of these ads were for the best known nonconsensual “undress” or “nudify” services on the internet.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 106 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Yet another example of multi billion dollar companies that don't curate their content because it's too hard and expensive. Well too bad maybe you only profit 46 billion instead of 55 billion. Boo hoo.

[–] themeatbridge 68 points 8 months ago (2 children)

It's not that it's too expensive, it's that they don't care. They won't do the right thing until and unless they are forced to, or it affects their bottom line.

[–] TwilightVulpine 29 points 8 months ago

Wild that since the rise of the internet it's like they decided advertising laws don't apply anymore.

But Copyright though, it absolutely does, always and everywhere.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

An economic entity cannot care, I don't understand how people expect them to. They are not human

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Economic Entities aren't robots, they're collections of people engaged in the act of production, marketing, and distribution. If this ad/product exists, its because people made it exist deliberately.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No they are slaves to the entity.

They can be replaced

Everyone from top to bottom can be replaced

And will be unless they obey the machine's will

It's crazy talk to deny this fact because it feels wrong

It's just the truth and yeah, it's wrong

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 1 points 7 months ago

Everyone from top to bottom can be replaced

Once you enter the actual business sector and find out how much information is siloed or sequestered in the hands of a few power users, I think you're going to be disappointed to discover this has never been true.

More than one business has failed because a key member of the team left, got an ill-conceived promotion, or died.

[–] Aermis 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Your example is 9 billion difference. This would not cost 9 billion. It wouldn't even cost 1 billion.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah realistically you're talking about a team of 10 to 30 people whose entire job is to give the final thumbs up or thumbs down to an ad.

You're talking one to three million dollars a year, maybe throw an extra million on for the VP.

Chump change, they just don't want to pay it cuz nobody's forcing them to

[–] JJROKCZ 4 points 7 months ago

It would take more than 10-30 to run a content review department for any of the major social media firms, but your point still stands that it wouldn’t be a billion annually. A few 10s of millions between wages/benefits/equipment/software all combined annually

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Shouldn't AI be good at detecting and flagging ads like these?

[–] kerrigan778 8 points 8 months ago

"Shouldn't AI be good" nah.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

Build an AI that will flag immoral ads and potentially lose you revenue

Build an AI to say you're using AI to moderate ads but it somehow misses the most profitable bad actors

Which do you think Meta is doing?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well too bad maybe you only profit 46 billion instead of 55 billion.

I can't possibly imagine this quality of clickbait is bringing in $9B annually.

Maybe I'm wrong. But this feels like the sort of thing a business does when its trying to juice the same lemon for the fourth or fifth time.

[–] bitwaba 11 points 8 months ago

It's not that the clickbait is bringing in $9B, it's that it would cost $9B to moderate it.