4 ms·

Meaning, difficult to create a filter that "knows it when it sees it." http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/09/27/the-origins-of-justice-stewarts-i-know-it-when-i-see

Meaning, difficult to create a filter that "knows it when it sees it." http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/09/27/the-origins-of-justice-stewarts-i-know-it-when-i-see-it/ http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/09/27/the-origins-of-justice-s...

joesmo 10y ago
Meaning FB is too fucking stupid to hire a person who knows the difference between child porn and iconic war images. It's not that rare to find people with common sense who can discern the two, even in the US. From what I understand, all these decisions get made by actual humans at FB and therefore have nothing to do with algorithms. The algorithm may flag the initial image, but it's the stupid human that approves that decision.
- sctb 10y ago
  Please stop. Insults are not OK on Hacker News, and the need for civility when discussing controversial topics is greater, not lesser. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ourmandave 10y ago
  Given the sheer volume, I honestly wonder if a human does ever see it unless it's called out on Twitter (or whatever). Even if it's flagged as an Iconic Image, you have to look at the context and see if it isn't posted by Jared from Subway. Easier to auto flag than make a "waiting for glacially slow human" queue. (Esp. when one-million-moms has a protest van idling on the launch deck 24/7.)
- Raphmedia 10y ago
  Honestly, that person probably had a form that went: [x] Children [x] Naked And the system did the rest. I doubt they also have [ ] Socially acceptable photo of naked children on the form.
FireBeyond 10y ago
Except in both instances they acknowledged that it was the result of a 'Report' and then a human review, and not an algorithmic decision.
Retra 10y ago
All you really need is a filter that recognizes a few select images and allow them through. And adding something to that list shouldn't take much time, effort, or controversy.

joesmo 10y ago

Meaning FB is too fucking stupid to hire a person who knows the difference between child porn and iconic war images. It's not that rare to find people with common sense who can discern the two, even in the US. From what I understand, all these decisions get made by actual humans at FB and therefore have nothing to do with algorithms. The algorithm may flag the initial image, but it's the stupid human that approves that decision.

sctb 10y ago
Please stop. Insults are not OK on Hacker News, and the need for civility when discussing controversial topics is greater, not lesser. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
ourmandave 10y ago
Given the sheer volume, I honestly wonder if a human does ever see it unless it's called out on Twitter (or whatever). Even if it's flagged as an Iconic Image, you have to look at the context and see if it isn't posted by Jared from Subway. Easier to auto flag than make a "waiting for glacially slow human" queue. (Esp. when one-million-moms has a protest van idling on the launch deck 24/7.)
Raphmedia 10y ago
Honestly, that person probably had a form that went: [x] Children [x] Naked And the system did the rest. I doubt they also have [ ] Socially acceptable photo of naked children on the form.

FireBeyond 10y ago

Except in both instances they acknowledged that it was the result of a 'Report' and then a human review, and not an algorithmic decision.

Retra 10y ago

All you really need is a filter that recognizes a few select images and allow them through. And adding something to that list shouldn't take much time, effort, or controversy.