19 ms·

One woman's struggle to remove all traces of videotaped sexual assault

211 points by barry-cotter 6y ago

darkerside 6y ago
This seems like an actual case where you could use machine learning to detect and remove instances of this video, or automate the sending of takedown requests. That would however require that the aggregators actually care.
- tgv 6y ago
  Only check the item of a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26681936 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26681936
- Spivak 6y ago
  So yes but I think the real answer would just be to have sites support ContentID and once a victim registers a video with the system it will automatically be taken down.
- hilldude 6y ago
  Looks like they are already doing it: https://help.pornhub.com/hc/en-us/articles/1260803955549-Transparency-Report https://help.pornhub.com/hc/en-us/articles/1260803955549-Tra... CSAI Match – YouTube’s proprietary technology for combating child sexual abuse imagery. In 2020, we scanned all video content previously uploaded to Pornhub against YouTube’s CSAI Match and continue to scan all new uploads. PhotoDNA – Microsoft’s technology that aids in finding and removing known images of child sexual abuse material. In 2020, we scanned all photos previously uploaded to Pornhub through Microsoft’s PhotoDNA, and continue to scan all new uploads. Google's Content Safety API – Google’s artificial intelligence (AI) technology designed to help identify online child sexual abuse material. Initially built to help detect all “not safe for work content” as well as illegal content, Google’s Content Safety API attributes a score to content, which in turn serves as an additional tool available for our moderation team. MediaWise – Vobile’s cyber “fingerprinting” software that scans all new user uploads in order to help prevent previously identified offending content from being re-uploaded. Safeguard – Safeguard is Pornhub’s proprietary image recognition technology designed with the purpose of combatting both child sexual abuse imagery and non-consensual content, like revenge pornography, and helping to prevent the re-uploading of that content to our platform and any other platform that uses Safeguard. We believe in sharing this technology with other social media platforms, video sharing platforms, non-profits, and governmental organizations, free of charge, to help make our platform, as well as the Internet at large, a safer place for all by helping to limit the spread of this harmful content. We also will provide the Safeguard technology to our Trusted Flaggers so that our Trusted Flaggers can fingerprint content on behalf of victims or potential victims.
symlinkk 6y ago
It sounds like other sites (not pornhub.com) have the porn video she’s trying to remove, and she doesn’t understand that Pornhub isn’t in control of them. Doesn’t really seem like Pornhub’s at fault here, and I question the motives of a journalist who writes something like this
- gccs 6y ago
  If you've been paying attention to the news in the past few years, its been increasingly obvious the lack of research and effort put into new posts. We live in the era of social media where the headline is the only thing that 99% of people read. The actual content of the article is irrelevant. People will be outraged for a second and then continue scrolling and completely forget it existed 5 minutes later. There is no economic incentive for journalists to do any real journalism.
- mcphage 6y ago
  > It sounds like other sites (not pornhub.com) have the porn video she’s trying to remove, and she doesn’t understand that Pornhub isn’t in control of them. Doesn’t really seem like Pornhub’s at fault here (1) Given the nature of the pornography industry, most sites are owned by a small number of players, so it's definitely not clear that Pornhub isn't in control of them. (2) As the article describes, Pornhub offers a service which is exactly what she is demanding: 'Pornhub offers something called its “exclusive model program,” which promises that it will send takedown notices to any website to “help protect your content from being uploaded to other websites.”' And so even if Pornhub is not in control of the sites where the video is hosted, they already advertise the ability to get content taken down from other sites.
  - claudiawerner 6y ago
    >(1) Given the nature of the pornography industry, most sites are owned by a small number of players, so it's definitely not clear that Pornhub isn't in control of them. It also doesn't mean they are in control of them. I think it's reasonable to assume that PornHub doesn't own every site the video was uploaded on. >Pornhub offers a service which is exactly what she is demanding This is almost certainly on the basis of copyright. As in, those 'exclusive models' sign over the copyright to their content to PornHub, or authorize PornHub to act on their behalf as copyright holders. PornHub then issus DMCA takedown notices or uses some other 'takedown notice'. In order for this to work, she would have to be the copyright owner of the video. If anything, in a horribly ironic twist, her ex-husband is likely the copyright holder. She has no standing (speaking in terms of copyright) to get PH to protect her video like they do with the exclusive model program. If you know more about how it works, then please inform me, but I can only assume it's copyright.
imwillofficial 6y ago
This is so messed up. I can’t even imagine what that must be like. The dark side of “the Internet never forgets.”
cblconfederate 6y ago
> However, when she searched for the name of the video on Google in January, it still returned 1,900 results. It seems that although Pornhub had removed the video, it still kept thumbnails of the naked images. Because those thumbnails still existed, a Google search would find – and display - those naked images. She realized the only way to eliminate those was to get Pornhub to remove all traces of the thumbnail images. It seems the problem was / is Google (and not pornhub), because makes it impossible to remove stuff from the internet fast enough to prevent damage. I wonder why the article doesn't consider it. Google should have an on demand mechanism to instantly deletes all text/images that match a fingerprint .
- elliekelly 6y ago
  Perhaps I’m not understanding but why couldn’t PH just remove the thumbnails so they couldn’t be indexed anymore? Sure, Google should have a mechanism so material like that isn’t indexed but Google isn’t the only search engine and PH shouldn’t be hosting that content, not even as a thumbnail.
  - MattGaiser 6y ago
    > why couldn’t PH just remove the thumbnails so they couldn’t be indexed anymore? > Kevin responded again, insisting that Pornhub “can NOT” remove content from other sites. However, that doesn’t seem to be completely accurate. Pornhub offers something called its “exclusive model program,” which promises that it will send takedown notices to any website to “help protect your content from being uploaded to other websites.” I am not sure that PornHub actually hosts those thumbnails or necessarily controls them. Sending a takedown notice indicates to me that they don't control that content. They would just be requesting removal.
  - cblconfederate 6y ago
    Even if they did remove it, how long would it take for google to remove their copy? That's why it's better to have an on-demand mechanism to remove content.
- mrweasel 6y ago
dfxm12 6y ago
It sucks that this is a case where no amount of money & no punishment of anyone involved can really make the victim whole. Some things require a time machine to fix.
- hypertele-Xii 6y ago
  What a shitty attitude. Once a victim, forever a victim? I propose to you a simple yet powerful idea: Shit happens, get over it. Life goes on. New experiences.
  - qzx_pierri 6y ago
    I suspect you’ll be downvoted, but I agree. People take the internet waaaaaaay too seriously now. Not downplaying their trauma. Crazy stuff happens online, but everyone’s attention span lasts for 30 seconds, so just move on, get some therapy, and try to ‘let it be’. I suspect stories like this will facilitate additional mass-censorship via complaints similar to “think of the children!!”, but framed towards adults who don’t understand how web archival works. But is this what we want? Don’t we love the internet because everything lives forever? Remove the story in the OP from your mind and respond without any emotion. I know I sound like a contrarian, but I really miss when the internet felt more dangerous and unhinged. People starting these justice campaigns for every little thing about the internet is not only futile, but also short sighted. Do we want more “mass deletions” of content like Tumblr, Pornhub, etc ? This is what happens when the internet is slowly homogenized into this business friendly, marketable, “safe space” for casual users. Sorry for the rant, but I’ve noticed this so much lately. YES terrible stuff happens online. YES it has been happening since before the author of this story was born. Deal with it the best you can, but stop using emotion to convince everyone that you will be “fixed” until every “bad” site is fully regulated and monitored.
    - AshamedCaptain 6y ago
      When I try to respond `without any emotion` to the question `Do we want more “mass deletions” of content like Tumblr, Pornhub, etc ?' , the answer that first comes up is `why not?`. The Spock couldn't care less about these websites -- they are mostly entertainment, after all -- and on the other hand the risk that they someday archive something that may damage you is not nil. So there is one clear cold, logical conclusion.
blfr 6y ago
Pornography is bad for its consumers, bad for willing actors, and obviously terrible for people featured without consent. Tolerating it will be one of the great shames of our time.
- GeoAtreides 6y ago
  I'm genuinely curious, how do you feel about erotica or written smut? How about drawn porn?
- pxue 6y ago
  Blaming porn is like blaming cheeseburger for obesity. While you're not wrong but it's hardly the root cause.
  - blfr 6y ago
    You're right, fast food is probably not the primary offender, and there are many causes (HFCS, seed oils, not cooking, abundance in general), and future is overdetermined... but fast food definitely carries some responsibility for the obesity epidemic. Same with porn and Pornhub. But it is the mental tobacco of our time.
    - viraptor 6y ago
      > mental tobacco [of] our time You may want to check how early does porn (or sexualised images) exist. "our time" may turn out to be "since we discovered drawing".
      - blfr 6y ago
        I don't see your point. Tobacco use is prehistoric, barely more recent than drawing.
        viraptor 6y ago
        What was your intended meaning for "of our time" in that case?
INTPenis 6y ago
Not trying to belittle this womans struggle but there are videos online where people are being hurt real bad and those videos will forever be someone's entertainment. World star hip-hop, and other sites like it, have almost made a business out of showing people be knocked out, kicked, punched and assaulted. That's what the internet is. A global network that spreads information at light speed. So I don't think attacking Pornhub specifically is the right thing to do here. That sort of smells of someone trying to make waves by going after one of the more established players in the internet porn business. What happened was awful but it has nothing to do with Pornhub. They're doing their best to police a giant platform that everyone in the world wants to use and abuse. They're not alone in this challenge.
- luckylion 6y ago
  > They're doing their best to police a giant platform that everyone in the world wants to use and abuse. [citation needed]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- elliekelly 6y ago
  > They're doing their best to police a giant platform that everyone in the world wants to use and abuse. It doesn’t really sound like they’re doing their best though, when they offer an aggressive content take-down service to their paying customers but not to victims of exploitation from whom they’ve (knowingly or unknowingly) profited.
  - INTPenis 6y ago
    Sure but put yourself in their position for a minute. How does pornhub even receive notice of this video being posted? How many others contact ph through this channel? How many of these cases are bogus and lead nowhere? Remember that this is the internet. If you open up any communication channel to your massive website you will be flooded with junk. So just to maintain a communication channel with the outside world is an entire project in itself. Probably requires its own manager and employees working full time with nothing but handling cases. And despite all this ph did respond on this case, they even tried sending takedown requests to OTHER SITES. Imo they did truly do their best. But the problem goes beyond pornhub. It's an internet problem. There is no simple resolution to this problem, unless you want to lock down the entire internet. And despite all these difficulties the stories posted still mention Pornhub as the problem. Pornhub is not the problem here. But I would not be surprised if Pornhub comes up with a solution. if coinbase can verify your identity to open an account with them then surely Pornhub can do the same for uploaders.
luckylion 6y ago
The whole "we're just a platform" thing makes it incredibly easy for Pornhub & co to just say "wasn't us, it was some user" and not even handle the deletion process on their affiliates' sites (who they provided the video + images to). It's like Mega Upload, which was obviously made for copyright infringement but successfully hid behind the platform-excuse for years. I'm not a friend of far-reaching regulation, but it seems that we don't have sufficient processes in place to deal with these companies unless there's gigantic financial interest involved that makes the state feel motivated to intervene.
- yummypaint 6y ago
  I would argue the copyright argument goes the other way. If you're a big vertically integrated corporation who has greased the right cogs it's incredibly easy to get content taken down wholesale without any oversight or accountability. Whether it's having content removed or restored, the burden somehow always falls on the individual.
- darkerside 6y ago
  You can say the same of Google in this instance
S_A_P 6y ago
No mention of it in the article but can’t charges be brought on the (ex) husband for this? Pornhub definitely owns some of the responsibility but the dude that did this is the bad guy here.
- sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  Yes Canadian law makes this a crime including civil damages.
- oh_sigh 6y ago
  It seems difficult for pornhub to do anything about this(from a hosting perspective), considering people also will upload completely consensual videos along the same lines (where the "victim" is just pretending to be passed out and is fully consenting). Pornhub could make you sign an affidavit, but even then, it is relying on trusting the uploading party - if they are already breaking the law by uploading non consensual sexual assault videos, odds are they will probably check the affidavit box saying that everyone in the video has consented.
  - Spivak 6y ago
    Sure, but you can't just check the affidavit box when you have to have all parties in the video identified, registered with the site with government ID, and everyone in the video has to approve it before it goes live. It's wild that we just offload all responsibility to the victims who have to scour the internet and issue takedown requests for videos because hosting sites literally can't be bothered to actually get consent beforehand.
    - oh_sigh 6y ago
      If there is a husband who is living with his wife, and he drugs her and sexually assaults her, wouldn't he also have access to her ID to scan it and upload it? I guess at a certain point, any kind of roadblocks will lower the chances this person uploading the content. What's the alternative to victims scouring the internet and issuing takedown requests? Some centralized porn database where you can type in someone's name and see what porn they've done?
blackbrokkoli 6y ago
That is honestly just the same old big tech story I've must have read a thousand times now. Sure, it is a little bit more sinister than usual even, but that's just because the company in question serves a market with some very dark corners, like the assault featured in the article. People here argue pro or contra porn prohibition or platform specifics, but it comes down to this: The Western world decided that giant multinationals sitting above countries, laws, ethics and responsibility holding all the data are the ultimate expression of the American Dream and should therefore exist undisturbed forever, growing bigger and bigger. Shit like this is just fallout from the gargantuan power distance between megacorp and human you get, by design. Sure, there are probably ways to get PornHub to be sorry for that, make amends, change some rules. Whatever. Last week it was Uber discriminating, here it's PornHub violating, maybe next week it will be someone having his business destroyed because he associated with a scammer in 2004 again. Every time there is juicy drama and a micro-outcome in this or that direction, but for someone reason the macro-problem gets mostly ignored.
- true_religion 6y ago
  It is hardly just changing some rules. Pornhub killed off the majority of their content, and removed the permissive copyright system that enabled them to become dominant in the market in the first place. For them, it’s a huge change.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- grecy 6y ago
  Though it starts out feeling a little dismissive, I think your comment does a good job of explaining the problem we have now is not limited to the mico level, but that it's a macro level problem. Now it's time to start talking about how we're going to fix that problem you have so rightly pointed out. It's clear the rules need to change, and it's clear we need to claw back the gargantuan power we gave over to mega-corps.
- routerl 6y ago
  > The Western world decided... It's not so simple[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
mensetmanusman 6y ago
Future prediction: This would be a good application of some thing like Ethereum NFT. Verified individuals could license their content, and it would be illegal to host anything unverified. This would make it harder to widely distribute illegal content and abuse. (it will never completely remove, but it raises the bar just like any law).
- folli 6y ago
  Hosting illegal content is already illegal. How would NFTs solve this?
  - datavirtue 6y ago
    The monetary barrier to attaining the NFT. I doubt her husband would have uploaded it if he had to pay $100-200 to do so. In general this is not a practical solution.
  - anigbrowl 6y ago
    If any uploaded videa were assigned a token, and one turned out to be illegal, any matches against the original token would trigger an auto-deletion.
    - mensetmanusman 6y ago
      This, the AI police of the future that automatically take down copyrighted information will just check against the chain.
- perlgeek 6y ago
  What would prevent a bad actor from getting verified, and then uploading material that they don't have consent/license for? What would prevent anybody from claiming they were the "talent" in the material and giving consent? Where would the "verified individuals" and their verification even come from?
  - mensetmanusman 6y ago
dustinmoris 6y ago
I bet if someone uploaded a video of all the dodgy tax avoidance these crooks do a spree gun it all over the internet these bastards would find a way to trace it and take it down in less than 24h. Maybe someone needs to start physically harassing all the CEOs of those shit companies and video document it so that they can’t live a single day of their lives without being violently attacked and harassed before they will find a way to take harassment serious.
hirundo 6y ago
Could this problem be largely resolved for Pornhub (at least) by using GAN generation to replace faces in submissions? Sort of "This porn star does not exist"? If done well, it could increase the average fap-worthiness of content, while preserving privacy. It could also be applied to other identifying characteristics, like tattoos and moles.
- ljp_206 6y ago
  "Solving" a problem deeply intwined with bodily autonomy and consent with 'obfuscate it until its no longer your body and face to abdicate you of control' seems like... The wrong approach. If actors/actresses are okay with it then let's go right ahead.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- dTal 6y ago
  You'd be happy with people jackin it to a video of you being sexually assaulted if they just obscured your face? In that case why bother with the fancy neural network stuff, just make sure to wear a paper bag over your head when you're being raped! Problem solved. /s Your proposal has merit as a privacy measure - but this isn't about privacy. This is about consent.
  - dredmorbius 6y ago
    Whilst you've a point here, there's also he case that revenge porn for which the subject isn't actually identifiable ... loses some of its punch. There's attacking the supply-side aspect. Though yes, masked assault remains assault
- leetcrew 6y ago
  if they could identify the face with sufficient accuracy, why not just take down the video?
ChrisArchitect 6y ago
'non-beta' link: https://www.ctvnews.ca/w5/i-will-always-be-someone-s-porn-one-woman-s-struggle-to-remove-all-traces-of-her-videotaped-sexual-assault-1.5371804 https://www.ctvnews.ca/w5/i-will-always-be-someone-s-porn-on...
gher-shyu3i 6y ago
And now with companies making it easy to make self produced porn, we're going to see even more levels of mental issues in the future when those women realize the mistakes they're making.
nunez 6y ago
> Rachel searched for the username that her husband had used. It led to a video uploaded to the world’s biggest porn site, Pornhub. In that video, it shows her, in her own bed, obviously unconscious. She says her husband’s hands can be seen reaching in to move her, touch her and sexually assault her. The video titles include “while sleeping” and “sleeping pills.” Isn't this a massive crime? How horrible.
- pjc50 6y ago
  Depends on the jurisdiction. The sexual assault is a crime, obviously, but very hard to prosecute even with this rare video evidence. Publishing nonconsensual porn surprisingly isn't a crime in a lot of places. Scotland recently criminalised it. Check your local jurisdiction.
kjrose 6y ago
The item I find with this is once it's online... it's never going away. Not without some form of incredible draconian overarching system. What could even be done with situations like this. Short of insisting that any content provider (pornhub included) be liable for all content posted to their site in perpetuity. (Which seems like a really dangerous idea and a good way to force extreme censorship online.)
- worik 6y ago
  They offer a service to paying customers, of removing content from all the affiliated sites. So they have more capability than they suggest. Not perfect, but much better
  - kjrose 6y ago
    They have the ability to encourage content removal. Not that they will be successful.
    - fencepost 6y ago
      Pretty sure the parent corporation owns a disturbingly high percentage of the video sharing sites. At the very least they own Pornhub, Redtube, Youporn as well as a bunch of others (Wikipedia about Mindgeek).
      - kjrose 6y ago
        That, if true, is even more disturbing to me. Imagine the blackmail potential of a corporation with that much data.
  - pgsimp 6y ago
    Maybe it is OK to ask money for such a service? I think in general that kind of service does exist. You can pay people or companies to try to remove as much as possible of your content from the internet.
- fencepost 6y ago
supergirl 6y ago
I don't get how pornhub still exists considering it hosts so many illegal videos: assaults, child porn, spy cams, etc. and this is the premier porn site. imagine what you can find on less mainstream porn sites. the US gov went full on war against torrent websites and closed every one of them no matter how small, yet this giant website that literally hosts rape videos is OK. all providers of PH should follow VISA and Mastercard and cut ties. I realize killing PH will not end sharing of videos but at least there will be a lot less money made from it and a lot less viewers.
- totalZero 6y ago
  I wonder what percentage of lawmakers are regular users of PornHub and its affiliates.
- pgsimp 6y ago
  Does it actually host so many illegal videos? It is difficult to verify those claims (as certainly one can't simply go there to search for some child porn, and usually the videos will already have been removed when a story is published). Maybe actual criminal proceedings could be checked with the police? Are there articles that provide such references?
  - ogurechny 6y ago
    See, the comment above you is how the reader of that article was supposed to react, while you are the irregular one asking questions. The article simply lies. Finding illegal content on a giant service like Pornhub is actually less likely because of the automated moderation and content identification systems that already have most of the unwanted content in their databases. In comparison, some small sites or forums might still have something uploaded a decade ago, and do nothing about it until someone complains. Also, if you think that a company of that scale doesn't have behind-the-scenes agreements with law enforcement (in addition to whatever legal obligations they have in native jurisdiction), you don't understand how internet works today, and who is the global policeman in it. Any serious internet user knows that stories of common people finding “loads of child porn” somewhere are obvious fantasies. Heck, even some other content that teens shared on CD-Rs 15 years ago is nowhere to be found today. But the article is clear about the type of people it addresses, and it's not actual internet users.
balozi 6y ago
Definitely not an easy issue to address but for argument sake, shouldn't the central claim be that of copyright? Is the claimant the copyright owner of the material, or can they become copyright owner by virtue of being depicted in the material?
supergirl 6y ago
this title is pretty mild. it should be something like "One woman's struggle to remove her drugged rape photos from pornhub"
ogurechny 6y ago
What a nice manipulative article perfectly targeted at clueless general public. So the criminal was her husband, the video was reposted by random users or just bots (probably not illegal, but can start a long talk about personal moral obligations), and the blame is on… Pornhub (because all other porn sites are supposedly very noble). First, because it is silently implied that all good websites should collect and check the official IDs of all good citizens uploading any data to them (what a great perspective), and, second, because it had The Download Button (this lame Don't-Copy-That-Floppy point gets stressed in most of the articles in anti-Pornhub campaign — bravo, incorruptible journalists). But what is the alternative? Of course, it's good old trusted porn studios that have all the papers to prove that women (and men) pretending to have sex on camera and even destroying the functions of their body parts have legal contract. Hooray! It is amusing how porn industry leveraged anti-porn, women's rights, and other groups to kill the competition from amateur and no-name internet content. It is clear that Pornhub owners understood that they can not refuse the offer, and the goal was reached: now Porn Site #1 is mostly a shop-front for big porn studios (and you can be sure they get their share of those horrible, horrible ad revenue money).
- onion2k 6y ago
  First, because it is silently implied that all good websites should collect and check the official IDs of all good citizens uploading any data to them (what a great perspective)... There's a significant difference between "uploading any data" and "uploading porn". Suggesting someone who is uploading porn should have to prove that they're entitled to, and that the people in the video have consented to be put online in the context of a porn video, is not unreasonable given the weight of evidence that "revenge porn" is incredibly damaging to victims.
  - Mirioron 6y ago
    What's the significant difference? I've seen viral videos of people in compromising or embarrassing situations. Some have even lost their jobs as a result. Should all video uploading sites demand documentation that every person in the video consents to it?
xyst 6y ago
Only way to get PH to act is to threaten their bottom line. Visa and MC threatened to stop processing transactions related to PH in response to a journalist article and then in less than a few days PH decides to haphazardly delete all of the non-partnered content (which includes innocuous videos as well).
- bigmattystyles 6y ago
  ..and forced them to bitcoin right before the latest massive uptick. If they've been sitting on them, while I'm sure only a tiny percentage will bother converting their account to BTC, and likely not enough to make up the difference, they could not have asked for a better timing.
- ogurechny 6y ago
  I guess most posters have already forgotten the previous big case of Visa and Mastercard declining to do processing of a client organization to praise this one as if it is a good thing. And, no, they couldn't care less about some article, and they most likely deal with much sleazier companies when it's “a matter of national/international importance”, or sufficiently high-ranking official asks politely for certain exempts. Such corporate reactions are agreed upon in advance. Even counter-terrorism arguments still mean that someone gets the right to define who is called a terrorist today for you. I can't see how this is good news. If you think that this isn't real danger, political activists in Russia have routinely be placed on “extremist” lists, which means all their bank accounts have been frozen. I know, I know, just following the law, someone has to stop the bad guys, etc.
matheusmoreira 6y ago
This problem is fundamentally impossible to solve. Once data has been created, it's trivial to make and transmit copies. Complete tyranny would be necessary to erase all illegal data from all computers in the world. The best people can hope for is removal of data from popular centralized services.
- bigmattystyles 6y ago
  The 'good' news is that with deepfakes everyone will (soon) at least have the veneer of plausible deniability. I know there will always be ways to determine whether something is a deepfake via adversarial detection but perhaps in the future so much content will be faked that unless it is a head of state or other renowned person, only then would it then be worth checking.
throway98752343 6y ago
How's this for a solution? 1. Any human can anonymously upload a video. 2. Any human to anonymously take down a video. 3. If the human includes official IDs for all the participants when uploading a video, only a request also including the official ID of one of those participants can take down the video. Rule one allows anonymous content. Rules two lets the aggrieved or regretful remove content without exposing themselves. Trolls could also take down professional content, so rule three protects videos that have documented consent. Once it's out there, all someone can do is disavow it. Deep fakes will help here.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
golemiprague 6y ago
Why Google not suppose to remove it from their search? If it is clear that it is done against her will who cares if pornhub display things or not, she asked Google specifically to remove it so they should remove it, otherwise they knowingly display illegal material. They had no problem hiding stuff just because it doesn't fit their political agaenda so it is not some thecnical issue.
rambojazz 6y ago
> She clicked on the username to see who had uploaded it. Rachel says a photo of her ex-husband appeared. The IQ here is on par with those (apparently)destitute tax evaders that post pictures of their new Ferrari on Facebook.
jhanschoo 6y ago
> “You guys decided to host a non-consensually uploaded video of my assault on your site for three years. I want every trace of this video removed. Not just from Google; from the actual internet… From your site specifically and from your affiliated sites, such as Thumbzilla. The thumbnail - that you created and distributed - is literally my naked body… Like, dudes – you’ve even been contacted by the police in regards to my video and you still have a picture of my boobs on your site. WTF?” > Kevin responded again, insisting that Pornhub “can NOT” remove content from other sites. However, that doesn’t seem to be completely accurate. Pornhub offers something called its “exclusive model program,” which promises that it will send takedown notices to any website to “help protect your content from being uploaded to other websites.” > It offers this “protection” to clients who pay a fee for this exclusive service. The point being that Pornhub has certainly requested content to be removed from other sites. I'm confused if said images are thumbnails hosted on PH or on third-party sites. If it's the former then PH is clearly at fault. In the latter case, there's nothing PH can legally do for her without actually contracting something with the copyright owner of the images (I'm not sure about other law regarding non-consenting depiction of people): broadly speaking, PH is able to request take down content on other sites with teeth because they own the copyright / license it. (IANAL)

211 points by barry-cotter 6y ago

This seems like an actual case where you could use machine learning to detect and remove instances of this video, or automate the sending of takedown requests. That would however require that the aggregators actually care.

tgv 6y ago
Only check the item of a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26681936 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26681936
Spivak 6y ago
So yes but I think the real answer would just be to have sites support ContentID and once a victim registers a video with the system it will automatically be taken down.
hilldude 6y ago
Looks like they are already doing it: https://help.pornhub.com/hc/en-us/articles/1260803955549-Transparency-Report https://help.pornhub.com/hc/en-us/articles/1260803955549-Tra... CSAI Match – YouTube’s proprietary technology for combating child sexual abuse imagery. In 2020, we scanned all video content previously uploaded to Pornhub against YouTube’s CSAI Match and continue to scan all new uploads. PhotoDNA – Microsoft’s technology that aids in finding and removing known images of child sexual abuse material. In 2020, we scanned all photos previously uploaded to Pornhub through Microsoft’s PhotoDNA, and continue to scan all new uploads. Google's Content Safety API – Google’s artificial intelligence (AI) technology designed to help identify online child sexual abuse material. Initially built to help detect all “not safe for work content” as well as illegal content, Google’s Content Safety API attributes a score to content, which in turn serves as an additional tool available for our moderation team. MediaWise – Vobile’s cyber “fingerprinting” software that scans all new user uploads in order to help prevent previously identified offending content from being re-uploaded. Safeguard – Safeguard is Pornhub’s proprietary image recognition technology designed with the purpose of combatting both child sexual abuse imagery and non-consensual content, like revenge pornography, and helping to prevent the re-uploading of that content to our platform and any other platform that uses Safeguard. We believe in sharing this technology with other social media platforms, video sharing platforms, non-profits, and governmental organizations, free of charge, to help make our platform, as well as the Internet at large, a safer place for all by helping to limit the spread of this harmful content. We also will provide the Safeguard technology to our Trusted Flaggers so that our Trusted Flaggers can fingerprint content on behalf of victims or potential victims.

symlinkk 6y ago

It sounds like other sites (not pornhub.com) have the porn video she’s trying to remove, and she doesn’t understand that Pornhub isn’t in control of them. Doesn’t really seem like Pornhub’s at fault here, and I question the motives of a journalist who writes something like this

gccs 6y ago
If you've been paying attention to the news in the past few years, its been increasingly obvious the lack of research and effort put into new posts. We live in the era of social media where the headline is the only thing that 99% of people read. The actual content of the article is irrelevant. People will be outraged for a second and then continue scrolling and completely forget it existed 5 minutes later. There is no economic incentive for journalists to do any real journalism.
mcphage 6y ago
> It sounds like other sites (not pornhub.com) have the porn video she’s trying to remove, and she doesn’t understand that Pornhub isn’t in control of them. Doesn’t really seem like Pornhub’s at fault here (1) Given the nature of the pornography industry, most sites are owned by a small number of players, so it's definitely not clear that Pornhub isn't in control of them. (2) As the article describes, Pornhub offers a service which is exactly what she is demanding: 'Pornhub offers something called its “exclusive model program,” which promises that it will send takedown notices to any website to “help protect your content from being uploaded to other websites.”' And so even if Pornhub is not in control of the sites where the video is hosted, they already advertise the ability to get content taken down from other sites.
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  >(1) Given the nature of the pornography industry, most sites are owned by a small number of players, so it's definitely not clear that Pornhub isn't in control of them. It also doesn't mean they are in control of them. I think it's reasonable to assume that PornHub doesn't own every site the video was uploaded on. >Pornhub offers a service which is exactly what she is demanding This is almost certainly on the basis of copyright. As in, those 'exclusive models' sign over the copyright to their content to PornHub, or authorize PornHub to act on their behalf as copyright holders. PornHub then issus DMCA takedown notices or uses some other 'takedown notice'. In order for this to work, she would have to be the copyright owner of the video. If anything, in a horribly ironic twist, her ex-husband is likely the copyright holder. She has no standing (speaking in terms of copyright) to get PH to protect her video like they do with the exclusive model program. If you know more about how it works, then please inform me, but I can only assume it's copyright.

imwillofficial 6y ago

This is so messed up. I can’t even imagine what that must be like. The dark side of “the Internet never forgets.”

cblconfederate 6y ago

> However, when she searched for the name of the video on Google in January, it still returned 1,900 results. It seems that although Pornhub had removed the video, it still kept thumbnails of the naked images. Because those thumbnails still existed, a Google search would find – and display - those naked images. She realized the only way to eliminate those was to get Pornhub to remove all traces of the thumbnail images. It seems the problem was / is Google (and not pornhub), because makes it impossible to remove stuff from the internet fast enough to prevent damage. I wonder why the article doesn't consider it. Google should have an on demand mechanism to instantly deletes all text/images that match a fingerprint .

elliekelly 6y ago
Perhaps I’m not understanding but why couldn’t PH just remove the thumbnails so they couldn’t be indexed anymore? Sure, Google should have a mechanism so material like that isn’t indexed but Google isn’t the only search engine and PH shouldn’t be hosting that content, not even as a thumbnail.
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  > why couldn’t PH just remove the thumbnails so they couldn’t be indexed anymore? > Kevin responded again, insisting that Pornhub “can NOT” remove content from other sites. However, that doesn’t seem to be completely accurate. Pornhub offers something called its “exclusive model program,” which promises that it will send takedown notices to any website to “help protect your content from being uploaded to other websites.” I am not sure that PornHub actually hosts those thumbnails or necessarily controls them. Sending a takedown notice indicates to me that they don't control that content. They would just be requesting removal.
- cblconfederate 6y ago
  Even if they did remove it, how long would it take for google to remove their copy? That's why it's better to have an on-demand mechanism to remove content.
mrweasel 6y ago

dfxm12 6y ago

It sucks that this is a case where no amount of money & no punishment of anyone involved can really make the victim whole. Some things require a time machine to fix.

hypertele-Xii 6y ago
What a shitty attitude. Once a victim, forever a victim? I propose to you a simple yet powerful idea: Shit happens, get over it. Life goes on. New experiences.
- qzx_pierri 6y ago
  I suspect you’ll be downvoted, but I agree. People take the internet waaaaaaay too seriously now. Not downplaying their trauma. Crazy stuff happens online, but everyone’s attention span lasts for 30 seconds, so just move on, get some therapy, and try to ‘let it be’. I suspect stories like this will facilitate additional mass-censorship via complaints similar to “think of the children!!”, but framed towards adults who don’t understand how web archival works. But is this what we want? Don’t we love the internet because everything lives forever? Remove the story in the OP from your mind and respond without any emotion. I know I sound like a contrarian, but I really miss when the internet felt more dangerous and unhinged. People starting these justice campaigns for every little thing about the internet is not only futile, but also short sighted. Do we want more “mass deletions” of content like Tumblr, Pornhub, etc ? This is what happens when the internet is slowly homogenized into this business friendly, marketable, “safe space” for casual users. Sorry for the rant, but I’ve noticed this so much lately. YES terrible stuff happens online. YES it has been happening since before the author of this story was born. Deal with it the best you can, but stop using emotion to convince everyone that you will be “fixed” until every “bad” site is fully regulated and monitored.
  - AshamedCaptain 6y ago
    When I try to respond `without any emotion` to the question `Do we want more “mass deletions” of content like Tumblr, Pornhub, etc ?' , the answer that first comes up is `why not?`. The Spock couldn't care less about these websites -- they are mostly entertainment, after all -- and on the other hand the risk that they someday archive something that may damage you is not nil. So there is one clear cold, logical conclusion.

blfr 6y ago

Pornography is bad for its consumers, bad for willing actors, and obviously terrible for people featured without consent. Tolerating it will be one of the great shames of our time.

GeoAtreides 6y ago
I'm genuinely curious, how do you feel about erotica or written smut? How about drawn porn?
pxue 6y ago
Blaming porn is like blaming cheeseburger for obesity. While you're not wrong but it's hardly the root cause.
- blfr 6y ago
  You're right, fast food is probably not the primary offender, and there are many causes (HFCS, seed oils, not cooking, abundance in general), and future is overdetermined... but fast food definitely carries some responsibility for the obesity epidemic. Same with porn and Pornhub. But it is the mental tobacco of our time.
  - viraptor 6y ago
    > mental tobacco [of] our time You may want to check how early does porn (or sexualised images) exist. "our time" may turn out to be "since we discovered drawing".
    - blfr 6y ago
      I don't see your point. Tobacco use is prehistoric, barely more recent than drawing.
      - viraptor 6y ago
        What was your intended meaning for "of our time" in that case?

INTPenis 6y ago

Not trying to belittle this womans struggle but there are videos online where people are being hurt real bad and those videos will forever be someone's entertainment. World star hip-hop, and other sites like it, have almost made a business out of showing people be knocked out, kicked, punched and assaulted. That's what the internet is. A global network that spreads information at light speed. So I don't think attacking Pornhub specifically is the right thing to do here. That sort of smells of someone trying to make waves by going after one of the more established players in the internet porn business. What happened was awful but it has nothing to do with Pornhub. They're doing their best to police a giant platform that everyone in the world wants to use and abuse. They're not alone in this challenge.

luckylion 6y ago
> They're doing their best to police a giant platform that everyone in the world wants to use and abuse. [citation needed]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
elliekelly 6y ago
> They're doing their best to police a giant platform that everyone in the world wants to use and abuse. It doesn’t really sound like they’re doing their best though, when they offer an aggressive content take-down service to their paying customers but not to victims of exploitation from whom they’ve (knowingly or unknowingly) profited.
- INTPenis 6y ago
  Sure but put yourself in their position for a minute. How does pornhub even receive notice of this video being posted? How many others contact ph through this channel? How many of these cases are bogus and lead nowhere? Remember that this is the internet. If you open up any communication channel to your massive website you will be flooded with junk. So just to maintain a communication channel with the outside world is an entire project in itself. Probably requires its own manager and employees working full time with nothing but handling cases. And despite all this ph did respond on this case, they even tried sending takedown requests to OTHER SITES. Imo they did truly do their best. But the problem goes beyond pornhub. It's an internet problem. There is no simple resolution to this problem, unless you want to lock down the entire internet. And despite all these difficulties the stories posted still mention Pornhub as the problem. Pornhub is not the problem here. But I would not be surprised if Pornhub comes up with a solution. if coinbase can verify your identity to open an account with them then surely Pornhub can do the same for uploaders.

luckylion 6y ago

The whole "we're just a platform" thing makes it incredibly easy for Pornhub & co to just say "wasn't us, it was some user" and not even handle the deletion process on their affiliates' sites (who they provided the video + images to). It's like Mega Upload, which was obviously made for copyright infringement but successfully hid behind the platform-excuse for years. I'm not a friend of far-reaching regulation, but it seems that we don't have sufficient processes in place to deal with these companies unless there's gigantic financial interest involved that makes the state feel motivated to intervene.

yummypaint 6y ago
I would argue the copyright argument goes the other way. If you're a big vertically integrated corporation who has greased the right cogs it's incredibly easy to get content taken down wholesale without any oversight or accountability. Whether it's having content removed or restored, the burden somehow always falls on the individual.
darkerside 6y ago
You can say the same of Google in this instance

S_A_P 6y ago

No mention of it in the article but can’t charges be brought on the (ex) husband for this? Pornhub definitely owns some of the responsibility but the dude that did this is the bad guy here.

sleepysysadmin 6y ago
Yes Canadian law makes this a crime including civil damages.
oh_sigh 6y ago
It seems difficult for pornhub to do anything about this(from a hosting perspective), considering people also will upload completely consensual videos along the same lines (where the "victim" is just pretending to be passed out and is fully consenting). Pornhub could make you sign an affidavit, but even then, it is relying on trusting the uploading party - if they are already breaking the law by uploading non consensual sexual assault videos, odds are they will probably check the affidavit box saying that everyone in the video has consented.
- Spivak 6y ago
  Sure, but you can't just check the affidavit box when you have to have all parties in the video identified, registered with the site with government ID, and everyone in the video has to approve it before it goes live. It's wild that we just offload all responsibility to the victims who have to scour the internet and issue takedown requests for videos because hosting sites literally can't be bothered to actually get consent beforehand.
  - oh_sigh 6y ago
    If there is a husband who is living with his wife, and he drugs her and sexually assaults her, wouldn't he also have access to her ID to scan it and upload it? I guess at a certain point, any kind of roadblocks will lower the chances this person uploading the content. What's the alternative to victims scouring the internet and issuing takedown requests? Some centralized porn database where you can type in someone's name and see what porn they've done?

blackbrokkoli 6y ago

That is honestly just the same old big tech story I've must have read a thousand times now. Sure, it is a little bit more sinister than usual even, but that's just because the company in question serves a market with some very dark corners, like the assault featured in the article. People here argue pro or contra porn prohibition or platform specifics, but it comes down to this: The Western world decided that giant multinationals sitting above countries, laws, ethics and responsibility holding all the data are the ultimate expression of the American Dream and should therefore exist undisturbed forever, growing bigger and bigger. Shit like this is just fallout from the gargantuan power distance between megacorp and human you get, by design. Sure, there are probably ways to get PornHub to be sorry for that, make amends, change some rules. Whatever. Last week it was Uber discriminating, here it's PornHub violating, maybe next week it will be someone having his business destroyed because he associated with a scammer in 2004 again. Every time there is juicy drama and a micro-outcome in this or that direction, but for someone reason the macro-problem gets mostly ignored.

true_religion 6y ago
It is hardly just changing some rules. Pornhub killed off the majority of their content, and removed the permissive copyright system that enabled them to become dominant in the market in the first place. For them, it’s a huge change.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
grecy 6y ago
Though it starts out feeling a little dismissive, I think your comment does a good job of explaining the problem we have now is not limited to the mico level, but that it's a macro level problem. Now it's time to start talking about how we're going to fix that problem you have so rightly pointed out. It's clear the rules need to change, and it's clear we need to claw back the gargantuan power we gave over to mega-corps.
routerl 6y ago
> The Western world decided... It's not so simple[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent

mensetmanusman 6y ago

Future prediction: This would be a good application of some thing like Ethereum NFT. Verified individuals could license their content, and it would be illegal to host anything unverified. This would make it harder to widely distribute illegal content and abuse. (it will never completely remove, but it raises the bar just like any law).

folli 6y ago
Hosting illegal content is already illegal. How would NFTs solve this?
- datavirtue 6y ago
  The monetary barrier to attaining the NFT. I doubt her husband would have uploaded it if he had to pay $100-200 to do so. In general this is not a practical solution.
- anigbrowl 6y ago
  If any uploaded videa were assigned a token, and one turned out to be illegal, any matches against the original token would trigger an auto-deletion.
  - mensetmanusman 6y ago
    This, the AI police of the future that automatically take down copyrighted information will just check against the chain.
perlgeek 6y ago
What would prevent a bad actor from getting verified, and then uploading material that they don't have consent/license for? What would prevent anybody from claiming they were the "talent" in the material and giving consent? Where would the "verified individuals" and their verification even come from?
- mensetmanusman 6y ago

dustinmoris 6y ago

I bet if someone uploaded a video of all the dodgy tax avoidance these crooks do a spree gun it all over the internet these bastards would find a way to trace it and take it down in less than 24h. Maybe someone needs to start physically harassing all the CEOs of those shit companies and video document it so that they can’t live a single day of their lives without being violently attacked and harassed before they will find a way to take harassment serious.

hirundo 6y ago

Could this problem be largely resolved for Pornhub (at least) by using GAN generation to replace faces in submissions? Sort of "This porn star does not exist"? If done well, it could increase the average fap-worthiness of content, while preserving privacy. It could also be applied to other identifying characteristics, like tattoos and moles.

ljp_206 6y ago
"Solving" a problem deeply intwined with bodily autonomy and consent with 'obfuscate it until its no longer your body and face to abdicate you of control' seems like... The wrong approach. If actors/actresses are okay with it then let's go right ahead.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
dTal 6y ago
You'd be happy with people jackin it to a video of you being sexually assaulted if they just obscured your face? In that case why bother with the fancy neural network stuff, just make sure to wear a paper bag over your head when you're being raped! Problem solved. /s Your proposal has merit as a privacy measure - but this isn't about privacy. This is about consent.
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  Whilst you've a point here, there's also he case that revenge porn for which the subject isn't actually identifiable ... loses some of its punch. There's attacking the supply-side aspect. Though yes, masked assault remains assault
leetcrew 6y ago
if they could identify the face with sufficient accuracy, why not just take down the video?

ChrisArchitect 6y ago

'non-beta' link: https://www.ctvnews.ca/w5/i-will-always-be-someone-s-porn-one-woman-s-struggle-to-remove-all-traces-of-her-videotaped-sexual-assault-1.5371804 https://www.ctvnews.ca/w5/i-will-always-be-someone-s-porn-on...

gher-shyu3i 6y ago

And now with companies making it easy to make self produced porn, we're going to see even more levels of mental issues in the future when those women realize the mistakes they're making.

nunez 6y ago

> Rachel searched for the username that her husband had used. It led to a video uploaded to the world’s biggest porn site, Pornhub. In that video, it shows her, in her own bed, obviously unconscious. She says her husband’s hands can be seen reaching in to move her, touch her and sexually assault her. The video titles include “while sleeping” and “sleeping pills.” Isn't this a massive crime? How horrible.

pjc50 6y ago
Depends on the jurisdiction. The sexual assault is a crime, obviously, but very hard to prosecute even with this rare video evidence. Publishing nonconsensual porn surprisingly isn't a crime in a lot of places. Scotland recently criminalised it. Check your local jurisdiction.

kjrose 6y ago

The item I find with this is once it's online... it's never going away. Not without some form of incredible draconian overarching system. What could even be done with situations like this. Short of insisting that any content provider (pornhub included) be liable for all content posted to their site in perpetuity. (Which seems like a really dangerous idea and a good way to force extreme censorship online.)

worik 6y ago
They offer a service to paying customers, of removing content from all the affiliated sites. So they have more capability than they suggest. Not perfect, but much better
- kjrose 6y ago
  They have the ability to encourage content removal. Not that they will be successful.
  - fencepost 6y ago
    Pretty sure the parent corporation owns a disturbingly high percentage of the video sharing sites. At the very least they own Pornhub, Redtube, Youporn as well as a bunch of others (Wikipedia about Mindgeek).
    - kjrose 6y ago
      That, if true, is even more disturbing to me. Imagine the blackmail potential of a corporation with that much data.
- pgsimp 6y ago
  Maybe it is OK to ask money for such a service? I think in general that kind of service does exist. You can pay people or companies to try to remove as much as possible of your content from the internet.
fencepost 6y ago

supergirl 6y ago

I don't get how pornhub still exists considering it hosts so many illegal videos: assaults, child porn, spy cams, etc. and this is the premier porn site. imagine what you can find on less mainstream porn sites. the US gov went full on war against torrent websites and closed every one of them no matter how small, yet this giant website that literally hosts rape videos is OK. all providers of PH should follow VISA and Mastercard and cut ties. I realize killing PH will not end sharing of videos but at least there will be a lot less money made from it and a lot less viewers.

totalZero 6y ago
I wonder what percentage of lawmakers are regular users of PornHub and its affiliates.
pgsimp 6y ago
Does it actually host so many illegal videos? It is difficult to verify those claims (as certainly one can't simply go there to search for some child porn, and usually the videos will already have been removed when a story is published). Maybe actual criminal proceedings could be checked with the police? Are there articles that provide such references?
- ogurechny 6y ago
  See, the comment above you is how the reader of that article was supposed to react, while you are the irregular one asking questions. The article simply lies. Finding illegal content on a giant service like Pornhub is actually less likely because of the automated moderation and content identification systems that already have most of the unwanted content in their databases. In comparison, some small sites or forums might still have something uploaded a decade ago, and do nothing about it until someone complains. Also, if you think that a company of that scale doesn't have behind-the-scenes agreements with law enforcement (in addition to whatever legal obligations they have in native jurisdiction), you don't understand how internet works today, and who is the global policeman in it. Any serious internet user knows that stories of common people finding “loads of child porn” somewhere are obvious fantasies. Heck, even some other content that teens shared on CD-Rs 15 years ago is nowhere to be found today. But the article is clear about the type of people it addresses, and it's not actual internet users.

balozi 6y ago

Definitely not an easy issue to address but for argument sake, shouldn't the central claim be that of copyright? Is the claimant the copyright owner of the material, or can they become copyright owner by virtue of being depicted in the material?

supergirl 6y ago

this title is pretty mild. it should be something like "One woman's struggle to remove her drugged rape photos from pornhub"

ogurechny 6y ago

What a nice manipulative article perfectly targeted at clueless general public. So the criminal was her husband, the video was reposted by random users or just bots (probably not illegal, but can start a long talk about personal moral obligations), and the blame is on… Pornhub (because all other porn sites are supposedly very noble). First, because it is silently implied that all good websites should collect and check the official IDs of all good citizens uploading any data to them (what a great perspective), and, second, because it had The Download Button (this lame Don't-Copy-That-Floppy point gets stressed in most of the articles in anti-Pornhub campaign — bravo, incorruptible journalists). But what is the alternative? Of course, it's good old trusted porn studios that have all the papers to prove that women (and men) pretending to have sex on camera and even destroying the functions of their body parts have legal contract. Hooray! It is amusing how porn industry leveraged anti-porn, women's rights, and other groups to kill the competition from amateur and no-name internet content. It is clear that Pornhub owners understood that they can not refuse the offer, and the goal was reached: now Porn Site #1 is mostly a shop-front for big porn studios (and you can be sure they get their share of those horrible, horrible ad revenue money).

onion2k 6y ago
First, because it is silently implied that all good websites should collect and check the official IDs of all good citizens uploading any data to them (what a great perspective)... There's a significant difference between "uploading any data" and "uploading porn". Suggesting someone who is uploading porn should have to prove that they're entitled to, and that the people in the video have consented to be put online in the context of a porn video, is not unreasonable given the weight of evidence that "revenge porn" is incredibly damaging to victims.
- Mirioron 6y ago
  What's the significant difference? I've seen viral videos of people in compromising or embarrassing situations. Some have even lost their jobs as a result. Should all video uploading sites demand documentation that every person in the video consents to it?

xyst 6y ago

Only way to get PH to act is to threaten their bottom line. Visa and MC threatened to stop processing transactions related to PH in response to a journalist article and then in less than a few days PH decides to haphazardly delete all of the non-partnered content (which includes innocuous videos as well).

bigmattystyles 6y ago
..and forced them to bitcoin right before the latest massive uptick. If they've been sitting on them, while I'm sure only a tiny percentage will bother converting their account to BTC, and likely not enough to make up the difference, they could not have asked for a better timing.
ogurechny 6y ago
I guess most posters have already forgotten the previous big case of Visa and Mastercard declining to do processing of a client organization to praise this one as if it is a good thing. And, no, they couldn't care less about some article, and they most likely deal with much sleazier companies when it's “a matter of national/international importance”, or sufficiently high-ranking official asks politely for certain exempts. Such corporate reactions are agreed upon in advance. Even counter-terrorism arguments still mean that someone gets the right to define who is called a terrorist today for you. I can't see how this is good news. If you think that this isn't real danger, political activists in Russia have routinely be placed on “extremist” lists, which means all their bank accounts have been frozen. I know, I know, just following the law, someone has to stop the bad guys, etc.

matheusmoreira 6y ago

This problem is fundamentally impossible to solve. Once data has been created, it's trivial to make and transmit copies. Complete tyranny would be necessary to erase all illegal data from all computers in the world. The best people can hope for is removal of data from popular centralized services.

bigmattystyles 6y ago
The 'good' news is that with deepfakes everyone will (soon) at least have the veneer of plausible deniability. I know there will always be ways to determine whether something is a deepfake via adversarial detection but perhaps in the future so much content will be faked that unless it is a head of state or other renowned person, only then would it then be worth checking.

throway98752343 6y ago

How's this for a solution? 1. Any human can anonymously upload a video. 2. Any human to anonymously take down a video. 3. If the human includes official IDs for all the participants when uploading a video, only a request also including the official ID of one of those participants can take down the video. Rule one allows anonymous content. Rules two lets the aggrieved or regretful remove content without exposing themselves. Trolls could also take down professional content, so rule three protects videos that have documented consent. Once it's out there, all someone can do is disavow it. Deep fakes will help here.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

golemiprague 6y ago

Why Google not suppose to remove it from their search? If it is clear that it is done against her will who cares if pornhub display things or not, she asked Google specifically to remove it so they should remove it, otherwise they knowingly display illegal material. They had no problem hiding stuff just because it doesn't fit their political agaenda so it is not some thecnical issue.

rambojazz 6y ago

> She clicked on the username to see who had uploaded it. Rachel says a photo of her ex-husband appeared. The IQ here is on par with those (apparently)destitute tax evaders that post pictures of their new Ferrari on Facebook.

jhanschoo 6y ago

> “You guys decided to host a non-consensually uploaded video of my assault on your site for three years. I want every trace of this video removed. Not just from Google; from the actual internet… From your site specifically and from your affiliated sites, such as Thumbzilla. The thumbnail - that you created and distributed - is literally my naked body… Like, dudes – you’ve even been contacted by the police in regards to my video and you still have a picture of my boobs on your site. WTF?” > Kevin responded again, insisting that Pornhub “can NOT” remove content from other sites. However, that doesn’t seem to be completely accurate. Pornhub offers something called its “exclusive model program,” which promises that it will send takedown notices to any website to “help protect your content from being uploaded to other websites.” > It offers this “protection” to clients who pay a fee for this exclusive service. The point being that Pornhub has certainly requested content to be removed from other sites. I'm confused if said images are thumbnails hosted on PH or on third-party sites. If it's the former then PH is clearly at fault. In the latter case, there's nothing PH can legally do for her without actually contracting something with the copyright owner of the images (I'm not sure about other law regarding non-consenting depiction of people): broadly speaking, PH is able to request take down content on other sites with teeth because they own the copyright / license it. (IANAL)