* False positive rate probably depends on the cut-off for when something is flagged up for a humnan to review, but yeah, for all we know could be high * No one

* False positive rate probably depends on the cut-off for when something is flagged up for a humnan to review, but yeah, for all we know could be high * No one quotes metrics based on the training set, so I'm sure these guys haven't done that. * Most trained ML models don't require much computing at all to make predictions. * The idea seems to be to flag content for review by a human, so there is a human in the loop * No one is forcing anyone to use this... so there's no straight forward censorship issue * maybe this does embarass bigger companies into explaining why they don't develop there own system to do this (removing IS content seems uncontroversial) - I presume this is why the Home Sec is really interested