5 ms·
If you post this image on Twitter, you're immediately suspended for 12 hours
- sprague 4y agohuh? I haven't tried it...is it somehow fooling a porn filter or something?
- palmetieri2000 4y agoOne of the comments says its a hash collision with some abusive material relating to doxxing.
- panda88888 4y agoI’ve always wondered that for hash table we always check that the key matches the target because of hash collision. Should the same be done here? For image hash matches, either run though an image similarity check or, if original image is not available (it’s so bad it can’t be stored), a secondary hash used to double check?
- rozab 4y agoIf this were a hash collision with some abuse image, then... why can I still see it? I don't get how something can be bad enough to warrant an instant temp ban but not bad enough to hide from the public
- nunez 4y agoMight be slightly fuzzed to prevent it from an auto-takedown
- joe_guy 4y agoYou'd presume abuse image prevention would use hashes that survive slight fuzzing. https://inhope.org/EN/articles/what-is-image-hashing?locale=en https://inhope.org/EN/articles/what-is-image-hashing?locale=...
- fowl2 4y agopresumably someone manually reviews the collided post and allows it
- fzzzy 4y agothey appealed it and it got put back up
- klysm 4y agoSo suppose this is a hash collision, I don't really think twitter is at fault here. Any solution you design has a false-positive rate. I am curious how they will resolve it though.
- matthews2 4y agoOf course it's Twitter's fault. These things should have a manual review.
- that1dude 4y agoSpoken like a person who does not consider the sheer volume Twitter (and companies like it) have to deal with. The company would go bankrupt if they hired enough people to handle all of the manual posts. They also can't just leave abusive images up... so this is the compromise.
- yellowapple 4y agoIt's so cute :)
- aaron695 4y ago