> Once we receive this notification, a specially trained representative from our Community Operations team reviews and hashes the image At first I wondered "Wh

> Once we receive this notification, a specially trained representative from our Community Operations team reviews and hashes the image At first I wondered "Why?!" Why does a "specially trained" person have to look at the very same intimate images that their users wish to prevent being shared. Then it struck me that without review, any image could be blocked, simply by submitting it through this process. This would also explain why the offline hashing approaches being suggested aren't practical - they're just too prone to abuse by flagging images that are not of a sexual nature, but that you would like to see blocked for whatever reason. An ML approach to masking the most sensitive portions of the submitted images would both protect the user, and reduce the burden on those tasked with reviewing the submitted images. If this could be handled on the client, and sent with a verifiable hash of the original image, that would solve the majority of concerns raised in the discussions here.