5 ms·

I don't know, I can see their point. It's not like they can review every picture individually, so they're going to need a general policy. They messed up, recei

• dragonwriter 10y ago
  > It's not like they can review every picture individually, so they're going to need a general policy. Even with a general policy, they still have to review whether a picture falls within the boundaries of the general policy. And there is no debate that they need a general policy, the debate is over what that policy should look like.
• joesmo 10y ago
  Maybe not, but they certainly can have a human review every single potential image after the fact (which they do if I remember correctly) because relying on an algorithm to do this is simply impossible and therefore even dumber than not being able to hire proper content screeners.
  • brainfire 10y ago
    Even if it's executed in the brain of a human content screener, it's still an algorithm- if you want it to be consistent, it has to be documented and clearly communicated to the screeners.
• pessimizer 10y ago
  > It's not like they can review every picture individually It's exactly like that. They could not allow pictures at all, not censor at all, or close down the business, too. Every option is open to them.
  • nck4222 10y ago
    Uhhh, right, but those options aren't really options since it would damage them far more than a policy that needs to be tweaked occasionally. "Shut facebook down" is a bit ridiculous. Congrats, you're technically correct that it's an option open to them.
    • pessimizer 10y ago
      So correct, then.