5 ms·

What's the base rate to compare this against? For other social networks, for other websites, for society as a whole. My general attitude about meta is that it's

What's the base rate to compare this against? For other social networks, for other websites, for society as a whole. My general attitude about meta is that it's cool to point out any flaw that might get people mad at them, but I just want to know if there is any reason to think this is a special problem they have. And, even though it's a double standard, I do get my hackles up when they start testing the waters to see how effective it is to imply that end-to-end encryption causes child abuse.

robcohen 3y ago
You see the same problem with universities, the military, the peace corps, etc. People have an agenda to push and they want to construct a simple narrative that supports that agenda. Simple as. Thanks for taking the time to point out that the narrative may be flawed, we need more people to do that.
Animats 3y ago
What's the definition of "sexually harassed"? Does it include being spammed with some form of sexual content? That would inflate the numbers.
- jncfhnb 3y ago
  That would inflate the numbers… correctly
  - maximus-decimus 3y ago
    If that's the case, then facebook sexually harasses me by showing me ads for Hooters and a Coffee where baristas only wear bikinis in Florida. I DON'T EVEN LIVE IN THE STATES, STOP SHOWING ME THOSE SOFTPORN ADS! Anyway, does that mean I can sue Zuckerberg for sexual harassment?
    - Goronmon 3y ago
      Exactly, it's important in these situations to put aside the concerns about children and instead we need to have a lengthy, detailed discussion on the exact nature of the use of the phrase "sexual harassment". Once we have accomplished that, we can truly acknowledge that we've made the world a better place.
      - quesera 3y ago
        If no one knows what it means, what are we talking about when we discuss it?
        xwolfi 3y ago
        Hot air, like most discussion online, especially when children and sex are involved.
  - Animats 3y ago
    The question is whether some kind of bulk generator is running up those numbers. A very small number of people can generate 100K spams per day. Historically, when spammers have been found, they've been small operators making a lot of noise.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  No, that qualifies.
  - quesera 3y ago
    Does it? Harassment is a behaviour. Offensiveness is a quality. And a subjective one, even. One thing can be both of course. But an offensive ad (e.g.) or a forum post with some kind of material of a sexual nature is not ipso facto harassment, unless someone took explicit action to harass you with it, I think.
- ShamelessC 3y ago
  lol
WesternWind 3y ago
I think the issue is that they could have taken steps to lower their rate, but didn't. There are steps even privacy-conscious companies can take. Like it doesn't even have to be E2E messaging, they could check the birthday of people, train an LLM to differentiate appropriate vs inappropriate comments on children's Instagram posts, and use that to help surface problematic comments. They could bring up a popup asking any child to report the conversation which would be triggered by client-side javascript based on a hashed word list of words commonly used by groomers. They could warn the kids whenever they upload images to share directly in DMs rather than publicly on their insta or fb. In a perfect world, the rate of grooming would be zero, but at Meta's scale, just creating even a little more friction that makes it harder to groom kids should be seen as worthwhile.
- brucethemoose2 3y ago
  > They could check the birthday of people, train an LLM to differentiate appropriate vs inappropriate comments on children's Instagram posts, and use that to help surface problematic comments. They could bring up a popup asking any child to report the conversation which would be triggered by client-side javascript based on a hashed word list of words commonly used by groomers. They could warn the kids whenever they upload images to share directly in DMs rather than publicly on their insta or fb. All this reduces engagement. That is the bottom line. Facebook can do more, but they won't unless something makes them, because it potentially costs billions. In fact, they seem to lobby for this kind of thing... But only if someone makes all their competitors do that thing as well.
- jimmygrapes 3y ago
  for me the issue is: why? followed by a few more "why?" and once the answer becomes "because." it becomes time to solve those intermediary questions. maybe that happens and nobody tells me, idk
- irjustin 3y ago
  > I think the issue is that they could have taken steps to lower their rate, but didn't. This is where it gets tough really fast. For arguemnt's sake, let's say semantic analysis can properly identify patterns well at 95% level (oooooffff already can see problems). Public/wall comments on any platform are relatively easy to police. But, I argue the vast majority of problematic grooming comes from DMs. Policing DMs seems worse than trying to do hash analysis of private photos. I don't think there's a win scenario here for anyone involved. [edit] > they could check the birthday of people, yeah because this is answered honestly by predators.
HideousKojima 3y ago
[flagged]

robcohen 3y ago

You see the same problem with universities, the military, the peace corps, etc. People have an agenda to push and they want to construct a simple narrative that supports that agenda. Simple as. Thanks for taking the time to point out that the narrative may be flawed, we need more people to do that.

Animats 3y ago

What's the definition of "sexually harassed"? Does it include being spammed with some form of sexual content? That would inflate the numbers.

jncfhnb 3y ago
That would inflate the numbers… correctly
- maximus-decimus 3y ago
  If that's the case, then facebook sexually harasses me by showing me ads for Hooters and a Coffee where baristas only wear bikinis in Florida. I DON'T EVEN LIVE IN THE STATES, STOP SHOWING ME THOSE SOFTPORN ADS! Anyway, does that mean I can sue Zuckerberg for sexual harassment?
  - Goronmon 3y ago
    Exactly, it's important in these situations to put aside the concerns about children and instead we need to have a lengthy, detailed discussion on the exact nature of the use of the phrase "sexual harassment". Once we have accomplished that, we can truly acknowledge that we've made the world a better place.
    - quesera 3y ago
      If no one knows what it means, what are we talking about when we discuss it?
      - xwolfi 3y ago
        Hot air, like most discussion online, especially when children and sex are involved.
- Animats 3y ago
  The question is whether some kind of bulk generator is running up those numbers. A very small number of people can generate 100K spams per day. Historically, when spammers have been found, they've been small operators making a lot of noise.
jacquesm 3y ago
No, that qualifies.
- quesera 3y ago
  Does it? Harassment is a behaviour. Offensiveness is a quality. And a subjective one, even. One thing can be both of course. But an offensive ad (e.g.) or a forum post with some kind of material of a sexual nature is not ipso facto harassment, unless someone took explicit action to harass you with it, I think.
ShamelessC 3y ago
lol

WesternWind 3y ago

I think the issue is that they could have taken steps to lower their rate, but didn't. There are steps even privacy-conscious companies can take. Like it doesn't even have to be E2E messaging, they could check the birthday of people, train an LLM to differentiate appropriate vs inappropriate comments on children's Instagram posts, and use that to help surface problematic comments. They could bring up a popup asking any child to report the conversation which would be triggered by client-side javascript based on a hashed word list of words commonly used by groomers. They could warn the kids whenever they upload images to share directly in DMs rather than publicly on their insta or fb. In a perfect world, the rate of grooming would be zero, but at Meta's scale, just creating even a little more friction that makes it harder to groom kids should be seen as worthwhile.

brucethemoose2 3y ago
> They could check the birthday of people, train an LLM to differentiate appropriate vs inappropriate comments on children's Instagram posts, and use that to help surface problematic comments. They could bring up a popup asking any child to report the conversation which would be triggered by client-side javascript based on a hashed word list of words commonly used by groomers. They could warn the kids whenever they upload images to share directly in DMs rather than publicly on their insta or fb. All this reduces engagement. That is the bottom line. Facebook can do more, but they won't unless something makes them, because it potentially costs billions. In fact, they seem to lobby for this kind of thing... But only if someone makes all their competitors do that thing as well.
jimmygrapes 3y ago
for me the issue is: why? followed by a few more "why?" and once the answer becomes "because." it becomes time to solve those intermediary questions. maybe that happens and nobody tells me, idk
irjustin 3y ago
> I think the issue is that they could have taken steps to lower their rate, but didn't. This is where it gets tough really fast. For arguemnt's sake, let's say semantic analysis can properly identify patterns well at 95% level (oooooffff already can see problems). Public/wall comments on any platform are relatively easy to police. But, I argue the vast majority of problematic grooming comes from DMs. Policing DMs seems worse than trying to do hash analysis of private photos. I don't think there's a win scenario here for anyone involved. [edit] > they could check the birthday of people, yeah because this is answered honestly by predators.

HideousKojima 3y ago

[flagged]