12 ms·

It's surprising to me (perhaps shouldn't be) how many people here are discussing this issue in the abstract using terms like "broadly harmless." To these commen

It's surprising to me (perhaps shouldn't be) how many people here are discussing this issue in the abstract using terms like "broadly harmless." To these commenters: are you unaware of the issue of child porn, revenge porn, stolen content* and videos of actual rapes being uploaded to Pornhub, and Pornhub making money off of this content? If you are aware of this (the core issue), you should be grappling with these issues rather than ignoring them. If you're not aware of these issues (the core issue here & the motivation for the actions of the CC companies), please read[1] & build that complicated issue into your view of the topic before commenting. These "what's the harm?" comments are really stupid, to put it bluntly. * and I don't care about DMCA & intellectual property, I'm talking about someone having their phone stolen & private pictures taken, or sending pics to a lover in confidence and having him humiliate her by sharing it online & telling friends and she can't get the pictures taken down. This isn't about IP it's about peoples' lives. 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/04/opinion/sunday/pornhub-rape-trafficking.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/04/opinion/sunday/pornhub-ra...

PunchTornado 6y ago
Revenge porn, rapes and other bad stuff are being uploaded to Facebook and Google too and they make money out of it Pornhub's official position, like Facebook and Google, is to have AI algos and teams of moderators to manually remove such content. (According to the article, Pornhub only had 118 incidences of child porn over the last 3 years whereas Facebook had 84 million incidents of child porn during the same time)
- bigbubba 6y ago
  Their 'AI algos' allow videos to be repeatedly reposted after being deleted, as detailed in the NYTs article.
  - PunchTornado 6y ago
    yep, the same with google and facebook.
    - bigbubba 6y ago
      I'd say google/youtube is much better at detecting known content actually, though they have a notoriously high false positive rate. Pornhub has a notoriously high false negative rate.
      - Consultant32452 6y ago
        In my mind the question is whether all of the relevant sites are making reasonable efforts in getting rid of illegal material. "Reasonable" here is probably best determined by courts, and I would dismiss any comparisons between sites abilities. If Google, a world leader in AI technology, has a better filter that doesn't mean anyone else's efforts are unacceptable.
        bigbubba 6y ago
        The question I have is whether such systems ever truly existed at pornhub. They're obviously shady as hell and I wouldn't put it past them to straight out lie. Google's systems are known to exist because they have a high false positive rate. How do we know pornhub gave a single shit about any of this before the NYTimes oped?
        Consultant32452 6y ago
        I agree, that is a very good question. I would also suggest that we should not take for granted the word of a media organization who wishes to get clicks or even a prosecutor who wants to villainize their target for political points.
    - DougN7 6y ago
      So what is your point? Two wrongs don’t make a right.
      - PunchTornado 6y ago
        you shouldn't arbitrarily target only some companies. my point is that facebook/google are the worst when it comes to revenge porn as it's easier to destroy someones' life there. But for some reason, instead of focusing on facebook, they focus on pornhub because it is an easy target and easy to say we've done something.
- therealdrag0 6y ago
  Are you sure that doesn't imply Facebook is being more diligent about catching it. Or the samples on facebook are easier to screen for?
  - PunchTornado 6y ago
    it was done by a third party organisation
    - therealdrag0 6y ago
      Nicholas Kristof writes: > The Internet Watch Foundation couldn’t explain why its figure for Pornhub is so low. Perhaps it’s because people on Pornhub are inured to the material and unlikely to report it. But if you know what to look for, it’s possible to find hundreds of apparent child sexual abuse videos on Pornhub in 30 minutes. Pornhub has recently offered playlists with names including “less than 18,” “the best collection of young boys” and “under- - age.” Is there any information that IWF has done more sophisticated audit than relying on user reports? Have they used advanced "fuzzy" searching algorithms that Facebook uses to identify known videos that have been modified in some way to get past filters?
- ajoy39 6y ago
  Then maybe Facebook and Google should be taken more effort to prevent this content from making it on their platforms. How is it happening more often elsewhere a justification for it to happen here?
whatever1 6y ago
The internet hosts all of the above. Let's shut it down.
- furyg3 6y ago
  'The internet' is not a for-profit corporation.
  - mrkeen 6y ago
    Just the ISPs then.
    - whatever1 6y ago
      And the manufacturers of hard disks that store the content
- tcgv 6y ago
  'The internet' is not a single, accountable, entity
- hfkldjsjfkdj 6y ago
  So all or nothing? What's wrong with some regulation especially when this will affect other sites as well.
  - whatever1 6y ago
    Exactly my point. Submit take-down requests and if the site owner does comply, then enforce penalties. But this is not the case we are discussing here. Here the site was sentenced to death regardless of its compliance.
mrkeen 6y ago
Two points of contention: 1) How wide do you cast the net for accountability? Bad content is a subset of unverified content, unverified content is a subset of Pornhub, Pornhub is a subset of an ISP's traffic and a subset of CC companies' revenue. How much good do you want to ban with the bad? 2) Why not actual law & order? I would guess a lot of fans of unverified content also dislike bad actors, and would like to see them investigated/prosecuted, rather than 'deplatformed'. 200 OKs for the good actors and gaoltime for the bad actors, rather than 401s for everyone.
- ce4 6y ago
  Pornhub and the (formerly named) company Manwin grew their business mostly on pirated content only to buy large porn studios later on with the gains. It surely helped that the industry wasnt too litigous and judges surely were reluctant to support such cases where the whole industry may be perceived as morally objectionable and indecent by parts of the society. Der Spiegel Magazin has an 8 year old article on Pornhub and its German founder, it's lengthy but worth a read: https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/fabian-thylmann-and-his-revolutionary-porn-business-model-a-873802.html https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/fabian-thylma...
- sequoia 6y ago
  To these commenters: are you unaware of the issue of child porn, revenge porn, stolen content* and videos of actual rapes being uploaded to Pornhub, and Pornhub making money off of this content? If you are aware of this (the core issue), you should be grappling with these issues rather than ignoring them. Sure I’ll answer your questions, but you go first & answer mine :) Agree that jail is better, if that’s an option I’ll take it. But if the options are “let a company make money off rape/cp/etc” or don’t let them do that, I’ll take the latter.
horsawlarway 6y ago
I don't think you're wrong - I think you're misunderstanding the scale of what's about to come. We can already generate realistic video/audio content based on a very small sample. We're going to get custom porn in the vein of celebrity fakes, but for EVERYONE. It was limited because it used to take time/skill to make. That's changing incredibly quickly. I'm fairly conflicted about how I feel about it, too. I'd wager a non-trivial chunk of my income you'll be able to upload a photograph, pick a category, and have custom generated porn some time in the next 10-15 years.
- dosethree 6y ago
  Gross. Last thing porn needs is to be more fake
- ajoy39 6y ago
  How does this have anything to do with REAL rape and REAL stolen video and images being uploaded NOW? Just because you can theoretically, in the future, make a fake video of someone having sex doesn't mean it's in any way justifiable to allow actual video of real violent crimes on your platform now. And even when this future does happen, do people no longer have a right to their own image and likeness? Is it okay simply because it's fake?
  - wruza 6y ago
    Is it okay to imagine? To think whatever you feel like to think at the moment? Rhethorical. The future that gp describes simply helps with it. Not questioning real harm to somebody ofc (as in physical/personal harm). People never had a right to their image, because it is neither unique, nor is really theirs with all these enhancements that we call “image”. Nobody can dictate you what to think. One little step from here and we’ll quite seriously discuss thought crimes.
    - ajoy39 6y ago
      There is a world of difference between what you imagine and creating a digital likeness of someone else, that will almost certainly then be distributed. Comparing the to and comparing the banning of them to thought crimes is incredibly dishonest. And yes, people do have a right to their image and likeness, those rights are protected by law.
Bakary 6y ago
Even the core business of PornHub isn't exactly harmless. I don't mean in a religious/moralistic way but for the same reason eating at McDonald's every day is probably not going to be great for you.
buisi 6y ago
How common is child porn on there? There have certainly been some horrifying cases. But, how common is it? How fast is it being taken down? And how long ago are the incidents being referenced? PornHub has done a lot in the past year to crack-down on problematic content, even before the purge. He focuses a lot on "things promoted towards pedophiles". But, he admits on many occasions, that the vast majority of the content (even in the problematic keywords) isn't problematic, and therefore, might just be simulated. He hasn't said how common the child porn is. He assumes there is a lot of it, although all indicators show it is low (there may be a lot more which hasn't been detected, but he seems to have dug really deep into the site). This isn't to excuse someone posting child porn or running a site which is likely to get such content with insufficient moderation. However, how big is the problem on there? Is there anyone who has quantified it? I am very curious to know. * I am not familiar with PornHub or those keywords. I am just going by what other people have said about this issue.
- SubjectToChange 6y ago
  How common is child pornon there? Given PornHub's actions, it seems not even they could given an confident answer to that question. PornHub may have stepped up its efforts but it has been mostly a reactive response to media pressure (which has been mounting), not a proactive one.

PunchTornado 6y ago

Revenge porn, rapes and other bad stuff are being uploaded to Facebook and Google too and they make money out of it Pornhub's official position, like Facebook and Google, is to have AI algos and teams of moderators to manually remove such content. (According to the article, Pornhub only had 118 incidences of child porn over the last 3 years whereas Facebook had 84 million incidents of child porn during the same time)

bigbubba 6y ago
Their 'AI algos' allow videos to be repeatedly reposted after being deleted, as detailed in the NYTs article.
- PunchTornado 6y ago
  yep, the same with google and facebook.
  - bigbubba 6y ago
    I'd say google/youtube is much better at detecting known content actually, though they have a notoriously high false positive rate. Pornhub has a notoriously high false negative rate.
    - Consultant32452 6y ago
      In my mind the question is whether all of the relevant sites are making reasonable efforts in getting rid of illegal material. "Reasonable" here is probably best determined by courts, and I would dismiss any comparisons between sites abilities. If Google, a world leader in AI technology, has a better filter that doesn't mean anyone else's efforts are unacceptable.
      - bigbubba 6y ago
        The question I have is whether such systems ever truly existed at pornhub. They're obviously shady as hell and I wouldn't put it past them to straight out lie. Google's systems are known to exist because they have a high false positive rate. How do we know pornhub gave a single shit about any of this before the NYTimes oped?
        Consultant32452 6y ago
        I agree, that is a very good question. I would also suggest that we should not take for granted the word of a media organization who wishes to get clicks or even a prosecutor who wants to villainize their target for political points.
  - DougN7 6y ago
    So what is your point? Two wrongs don’t make a right.
    - PunchTornado 6y ago
      you shouldn't arbitrarily target only some companies. my point is that facebook/google are the worst when it comes to revenge porn as it's easier to destroy someones' life there. But for some reason, instead of focusing on facebook, they focus on pornhub because it is an easy target and easy to say we've done something.
therealdrag0 6y ago
Are you sure that doesn't imply Facebook is being more diligent about catching it. Or the samples on facebook are easier to screen for?
- PunchTornado 6y ago
  it was done by a third party organisation
  - therealdrag0 6y ago
    Nicholas Kristof writes: > The Internet Watch Foundation couldn’t explain why its figure for Pornhub is so low. Perhaps it’s because people on Pornhub are inured to the material and unlikely to report it. But if you know what to look for, it’s possible to find hundreds of apparent child sexual abuse videos on Pornhub in 30 minutes. Pornhub has recently offered playlists with names including “less than 18,” “the best collection of young boys” and “under- - age.” Is there any information that IWF has done more sophisticated audit than relying on user reports? Have they used advanced "fuzzy" searching algorithms that Facebook uses to identify known videos that have been modified in some way to get past filters?
ajoy39 6y ago
Then maybe Facebook and Google should be taken more effort to prevent this content from making it on their platforms. How is it happening more often elsewhere a justification for it to happen here?

whatever1 6y ago

The internet hosts all of the above. Let's shut it down.

furyg3 6y ago
'The internet' is not a for-profit corporation.
- mrkeen 6y ago
  Just the ISPs then.
  - whatever1 6y ago
    And the manufacturers of hard disks that store the content
tcgv 6y ago
'The internet' is not a single, accountable, entity
hfkldjsjfkdj 6y ago
So all or nothing? What's wrong with some regulation especially when this will affect other sites as well.
- whatever1 6y ago
  Exactly my point. Submit take-down requests and if the site owner does comply, then enforce penalties. But this is not the case we are discussing here. Here the site was sentenced to death regardless of its compliance.

mrkeen 6y ago

Two points of contention: 1) How wide do you cast the net for accountability? Bad content is a subset of unverified content, unverified content is a subset of Pornhub, Pornhub is a subset of an ISP's traffic and a subset of CC companies' revenue. How much good do you want to ban with the bad? 2) Why not actual law & order? I would guess a lot of fans of unverified content also dislike bad actors, and would like to see them investigated/prosecuted, rather than 'deplatformed'. 200 OKs for the good actors and gaoltime for the bad actors, rather than 401s for everyone.

ce4 6y ago
Pornhub and the (formerly named) company Manwin grew their business mostly on pirated content only to buy large porn studios later on with the gains. It surely helped that the industry wasnt too litigous and judges surely were reluctant to support such cases where the whole industry may be perceived as morally objectionable and indecent by parts of the society. Der Spiegel Magazin has an 8 year old article on Pornhub and its German founder, it's lengthy but worth a read: https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/fabian-thylmann-and-his-revolutionary-porn-business-model-a-873802.html https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/fabian-thylma...
sequoia 6y ago
To these commenters: are you unaware of the issue of child porn, revenge porn, stolen content* and videos of actual rapes being uploaded to Pornhub, and Pornhub making money off of this content? If you are aware of this (the core issue), you should be grappling with these issues rather than ignoring them. Sure I’ll answer your questions, but you go first & answer mine :) Agree that jail is better, if that’s an option I’ll take it. But if the options are “let a company make money off rape/cp/etc” or don’t let them do that, I’ll take the latter.

horsawlarway 6y ago

I don't think you're wrong - I think you're misunderstanding the scale of what's about to come. We can already generate realistic video/audio content based on a very small sample. We're going to get custom porn in the vein of celebrity fakes, but for EVERYONE. It was limited because it used to take time/skill to make. That's changing incredibly quickly. I'm fairly conflicted about how I feel about it, too. I'd wager a non-trivial chunk of my income you'll be able to upload a photograph, pick a category, and have custom generated porn some time in the next 10-15 years.

dosethree 6y ago
Gross. Last thing porn needs is to be more fake
ajoy39 6y ago
How does this have anything to do with REAL rape and REAL stolen video and images being uploaded NOW? Just because you can theoretically, in the future, make a fake video of someone having sex doesn't mean it's in any way justifiable to allow actual video of real violent crimes on your platform now. And even when this future does happen, do people no longer have a right to their own image and likeness? Is it okay simply because it's fake?
- wruza 6y ago
  Is it okay to imagine? To think whatever you feel like to think at the moment? Rhethorical. The future that gp describes simply helps with it. Not questioning real harm to somebody ofc (as in physical/personal harm). People never had a right to their image, because it is neither unique, nor is really theirs with all these enhancements that we call “image”. Nobody can dictate you what to think. One little step from here and we’ll quite seriously discuss thought crimes.
  - ajoy39 6y ago
    There is a world of difference between what you imagine and creating a digital likeness of someone else, that will almost certainly then be distributed. Comparing the to and comparing the banning of them to thought crimes is incredibly dishonest. And yes, people do have a right to their image and likeness, those rights are protected by law.

Bakary 6y ago

Even the core business of PornHub isn't exactly harmless. I don't mean in a religious/moralistic way but for the same reason eating at McDonald's every day is probably not going to be great for you.

buisi 6y ago

How common is child porn on there? There have certainly been some horrifying cases. But, how common is it? How fast is it being taken down? And how long ago are the incidents being referenced? PornHub has done a lot in the past year to crack-down on problematic content, even before the purge. He focuses a lot on "things promoted towards pedophiles". But, he admits on many occasions, that the vast majority of the content (even in the problematic keywords) isn't problematic, and therefore, might just be simulated. He hasn't said how common the child porn is. He assumes there is a lot of it, although all indicators show it is low (there may be a lot more which hasn't been detected, but he seems to have dug really deep into the site). This isn't to excuse someone posting child porn or running a site which is likely to get such content with insufficient moderation. However, how big is the problem on there? Is there anyone who has quantified it? I am very curious to know. * I am not familiar with PornHub or those keywords. I am just going by what other people have said about this issue.

SubjectToChange 6y ago
How common is child pornon there? Given PornHub's actions, it seems not even they could given an confident answer to that question. PornHub may have stepped up its efforts but it has been mostly a reactive response to media pressure (which has been mounting), not a proactive one.