7 ms·

I'd wonder if frequents in these subreddits are typically professional and healthy people to have on a team, though (honestly no idea, never been). It's a stra

I'd wonder if frequents in these subreddits are typically professional and healthy people to have on a team, though (honestly no idea, never been). It's a strange conundrum because ideally you want good people who are comfortable watching things good people rarely want to watch. Don't have much experience with this demographic -- maybe there are more sane, emotionally healthy people watching snuff films for fun than I instinctively expect.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
As long as they have a pulse and can sit in the chair long enough to do the job they'll likely be fine. Content moderation farms, call centers and the like tend to optimize their internal processes such that they don't need to restrict their hiring to "professional and healthy people". There are plenty of people who are insane and unhealthy that can hack this sort of work.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  Do you want "insane and unhealthy" people who voluntarily look at horrifying stuff deciding whether that stuff should be allowed on the platform, though? It'd be like having a jury pool made up of serial killers.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    >Do you want "insane and unhealthy" people who voluntarily look at horrifying stuff deciding whether that stuff should be allowed on the platform, though? These kinds of bottom of the barrel places of employment tend to have their policies and procedures tuned to make sure employees do things the way the company wants them done. That's just the nature of doing an unskilled, non-laborious job for a BigCo. There will be automatic spot checks, audits, reviews, etc. It is no different than the cube farm on the next floor where they review images of documents that AI systems have flagged as possibly fraudulent. Such systems are likely in place already for their current moderators.
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      > These kinds of bottom of the barrel places of employment tend to have their policies and procedures tuned to make sure employees do things the way the company wants them done. Yes, but their hiring pool tends to be "everyone". Those procedures might not work as well if your hiring pool is explicitly confined to "the people who watch ISIS torture videos for fun". I suspect standard policies and procedures include "fire the people who get off on this stuff".
  - MattGaiser 6y ago
    Why not? They don't benefit from it being public. They do benefit from not being fired and presumably there would be audits.
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    This is usually a tempting fate question but what is the worst that could happen? They have little power to abuse and obvious accountability. If they block kitten and baby pics and allow people being tortured to death they'll get fired quickly after the inevitable shitstorm. Insane and unhealthy or creepy doesn't neccessarily mean dangerous. Even if they got twisted pleasure from it they would be gross but not inflicting actual harm. It isn't like people are being brutally murdered to give them kicks - they aren't a source of demand.
irrational 6y ago
I remember talking to an FBI agent who had to watch a lot of terrible stuff. He said that at first it was very distressing and sickening, but after awhile he became desensitized to it and could eat lunch with no issues while continuing to watch it. I wonder if some people have the psychological profile that allows them to become desensitized while other people never can. Though, it probably isn't good that people have to become desensitized.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  If one can become desensitized to loading people into ovens, they can certainly to pictures of the same thing.
Wohlf 6y ago
For me it was more like watching nature documentaries, morbid curiosity and all that. There wasn't really anything I'd consider snuff on that subreddit, it was natural death, murder, and accidents, all of which are part of natural life. I found most of the videos less offensive than extremely graphic horror movies, which ironically I have less stomach for. If anything that subreddit made me generally more aware of my surroundings and safer in my daily life.
teddyh 6y ago
> maybe there are more sane, emotionally healthy people watching snuff films for fun than I instinctively expect. Probably not, since there are no documented instances of any snuff films ever found.
- exolymph 6y ago
  A snuff film is a video in which someone actually IRL dies. There are about a zillion of them.
  - teddyh 6y ago
    A snuff film is defined by most as at least having been made for the purpose of entertainment of others. Some include the proviso that it has to have been made for profit, and yet others demand that it has at least been sold. But regardless, not even the first level of these criteria have ever been fulfulled. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/a-pinch-of-snuff/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/a-pinch-of-snuff/
    - EE84M3i 6y ago
      That article was last updated 2006 and does not take into account ISIS or Mexican drug cartel videos, which arguably meet your first definition and many would consider snuff.
      - teddyh 6y ago
        One could hardly make the argument that those videos were made to entertain anybody for their enjoyment. Terrorists make videos to terrorize, i.e. scare, people, not for people to enjoy.
        EE84M3i 6y ago
        Making the argument that is at least partially made for the entertainment of other terrorists doesn't strike me as outlandish. Personally I wouldn't make that argument though. Regardless my point was just that in my experience many would consider them 'snuff' even if it doesn't meet the exact technical definition.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago

As long as they have a pulse and can sit in the chair long enough to do the job they'll likely be fine. Content moderation farms, call centers and the like tend to optimize their internal processes such that they don't need to restrict their hiring to "professional and healthy people". There are plenty of people who are insane and unhealthy that can hack this sort of work.

ceejayoz 6y ago
Do you want "insane and unhealthy" people who voluntarily look at horrifying stuff deciding whether that stuff should be allowed on the platform, though? It'd be like having a jury pool made up of serial killers.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  >Do you want "insane and unhealthy" people who voluntarily look at horrifying stuff deciding whether that stuff should be allowed on the platform, though? These kinds of bottom of the barrel places of employment tend to have their policies and procedures tuned to make sure employees do things the way the company wants them done. That's just the nature of doing an unskilled, non-laborious job for a BigCo. There will be automatic spot checks, audits, reviews, etc. It is no different than the cube farm on the next floor where they review images of documents that AI systems have flagged as possibly fraudulent. Such systems are likely in place already for their current moderators.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    > These kinds of bottom of the barrel places of employment tend to have their policies and procedures tuned to make sure employees do things the way the company wants them done. Yes, but their hiring pool tends to be "everyone". Those procedures might not work as well if your hiring pool is explicitly confined to "the people who watch ISIS torture videos for fun". I suspect standard policies and procedures include "fire the people who get off on this stuff".
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  Why not? They don't benefit from it being public. They do benefit from not being fired and presumably there would be audits.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  This is usually a tempting fate question but what is the worst that could happen? They have little power to abuse and obvious accountability. If they block kitten and baby pics and allow people being tortured to death they'll get fired quickly after the inevitable shitstorm. Insane and unhealthy or creepy doesn't neccessarily mean dangerous. Even if they got twisted pleasure from it they would be gross but not inflicting actual harm. It isn't like people are being brutally murdered to give them kicks - they aren't a source of demand.

irrational 6y ago

I remember talking to an FBI agent who had to watch a lot of terrible stuff. He said that at first it was very distressing and sickening, but after awhile he became desensitized to it and could eat lunch with no issues while continuing to watch it. I wonder if some people have the psychological profile that allows them to become desensitized while other people never can. Though, it probably isn't good that people have to become desensitized.

mixmastamyk 6y ago
If one can become desensitized to loading people into ovens, they can certainly to pictures of the same thing.

Wohlf 6y ago

For me it was more like watching nature documentaries, morbid curiosity and all that. There wasn't really anything I'd consider snuff on that subreddit, it was natural death, murder, and accidents, all of which are part of natural life. I found most of the videos less offensive than extremely graphic horror movies, which ironically I have less stomach for. If anything that subreddit made me generally more aware of my surroundings and safer in my daily life.

teddyh 6y ago

> maybe there are more sane, emotionally healthy people watching snuff films for fun than I instinctively expect. Probably not, since there are no documented instances of any snuff films ever found.

exolymph 6y ago
A snuff film is a video in which someone actually IRL dies. There are about a zillion of them.
- teddyh 6y ago
  A snuff film is defined by most as at least having been made for the purpose of entertainment of others. Some include the proviso that it has to have been made for profit, and yet others demand that it has at least been sold. But regardless, not even the first level of these criteria have ever been fulfulled. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/a-pinch-of-snuff/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/a-pinch-of-snuff/
  - EE84M3i 6y ago
    That article was last updated 2006 and does not take into account ISIS or Mexican drug cartel videos, which arguably meet your first definition and many would consider snuff.
    - teddyh 6y ago
      One could hardly make the argument that those videos were made to entertain anybody for their enjoyment. Terrorists make videos to terrorize, i.e. scare, people, not for people to enjoy.
      - EE84M3i 6y ago
        Making the argument that is at least partially made for the entertainment of other terrorists doesn't strike me as outlandish. Personally I wouldn't make that argument though. Regardless my point was just that in my experience many would consider them 'snuff' even if it doesn't meet the exact technical definition.