3 ms·

I think it's actually impossible to use an AI to determine this type of thing. Even courts of humans sometimes rarely get it wrong sometimes with images that ar

I think it's actually impossible to use an AI to determine this type of thing. Even courts of humans sometimes rarely get it wrong sometimes with images that are open for debate (for example missing context) on whether it was abusive or not (parents bathing their kids, as one example). Then you have the whole can of worms that pedophiles will find sexual interest in images taken in non-abusive contexts but will use them none the less. How is an AI supposed to determine that. Even our laws can't handle that. There's also images that can be abusive if made public but non-abusive if kept private. For example what about a kid taking pictures of themselves nude (many kids don't have parental moderated accounts) and putting them on icloud (iphone does this automatically with default settings). It's a complete nuthouse and there's no way to do it. (Also don't get me started on drawn artwork (or 3D CG) that people can create that can show all sorts of things and is fully or partially legal in many countries.)

scoopertrooper 5y ago
They're not using an AI for that purpose. They're just sending a hash of the image and sending it along with iCloud uploads. The hashes are of images that have been identified by humans as containing child pornography.
- eurasiantiger 5y ago
  No, the hashes are visual hashes. It is completely possible that a clean shaven adult taking pictures of themselves could get flagged.
  - mrtranscendence 5y ago
    It's also possible that a picture of an avocado will get flagged. A nude photo of someone who's shaved themselves is unlikely to look so much like an actual CSAM photo that it'll get flagged. It's certainly possible, but again, so's the avocado.
- godelski 5y ago
  They're not hashes in the way md5sum or sha256 is a hash. They are _neural_ hashes. Which is not trying to fingerprint a specific image, but tag any image that is deemed sufficiently similar to the reference image. Hashes are unique, neural hashes aren't. To add, there are natural neural hash collisions in ImageNet (a famous ML dataset). Images that look nothing alike to us humans.
Grustaf 5y ago
Since the threshold is 30 images, and those images are matched to a curated database of abusive material, what you write here simply doesn't apply.

scoopertrooper 5y ago

They're not using an AI for that purpose. They're just sending a hash of the image and sending it along with iCloud uploads. The hashes are of images that have been identified by humans as containing child pornography.

eurasiantiger 5y ago
No, the hashes are visual hashes. It is completely possible that a clean shaven adult taking pictures of themselves could get flagged.
- mrtranscendence 5y ago
  It's also possible that a picture of an avocado will get flagged. A nude photo of someone who's shaved themselves is unlikely to look so much like an actual CSAM photo that it'll get flagged. It's certainly possible, but again, so's the avocado.
godelski 5y ago
They're not hashes in the way md5sum or sha256 is a hash. They are _neural_ hashes. Which is not trying to fingerprint a specific image, but tag any image that is deemed sufficiently similar to the reference image. Hashes are unique, neural hashes aren't. To add, there are natural neural hash collisions in ImageNet (a famous ML dataset). Images that look nothing alike to us humans.

Grustaf 5y ago

Since the threshold is 30 images, and those images are matched to a curated database of abusive material, what you write here simply doesn't apply.