4 ms·
A simpler way to remove explicit images from Search
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- guessmyname 9mo agoWhy is Google indexing these harmful images in the first place? Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and other large tech companies have had image recognition models capable of detecting this kind of content at scale for years, long before large language models became popular. There’s really no excuse for hosting or indexing these images as publicly accessible assets when they clearly have the technical ability to identify and exclude explicit content automatically. Instead of putting the burden on victims to report these images one by one, companies should be proactively preventing this material from appearing in search results at all. If the technology exists, and it clearly does, then the default approach should be prevention, not reactive cleanup.
- whatevermom5 9mo agoThey probably make money showing pork search results
- FrankBooth 9mo agoThat sounds haram.
- ahofmann 9mo agoFilthy pork addicts...
- whatevermom5 9mo agoOink oink
- osmsucks 9mo agoPorkin' across America! https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4NL9i-Fu15jdlr2KQf_lyhXl5f0PFnzF https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4NL9i-Fu15jdlr2KQf_l...
- Dylan16807 9mo agoHow is an image model supposed to detect if there was consent to share the picture? If you're saying they shouldn't index any explicit images, you're talking about something very different from the article.
- drdaeman 9mo agoI think that “one by one” part allows different interpretations of what guessmyname possibly meant. But I fail to make sense of it either way. Either the nuance of lack of consent is missing, or Google is blamed for not doing what they just did from the very first version.
- vasco 9mo agoI don't see how those religious groups that forced card payment processors to ban pornhub et al are not going to abuse this by mass reporting any nude picture they find as their own.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- BuyMyBitcoins 9mo ago>”those religious groups that forced card payment processors to ban pornhub et al” I question how much influence such groups actually have, given that payment processors already dislike dealing with adult oriented businesses. The percentage of chargebacks and disputes made for those transactions is significantly higher than any other category. Companies hate having to investigate such claims and issue new cards, even when it appears fairly obvious the purchase was made by the cardholder. It’s also tricky from a customer service standpoint, because the cardholder may likely be lying in order to hide an embarrassing purchase from a spouse or other family member. It seems like payment processors just want to get rid of a hassle for themselves.
- vasco 9mo agoWell the religious groups certainly take the credit for themselves and continue their quest, latest was Steam. https://www.collectiveshout.org/progress_in_global_campaign_to_shut_down_pornhub https://www.collectiveshout.org/progress_in_global_campaign_...
- mlindner 9mo agoGoogle practically never shows explicit images to anyone anymore anyway. Even bing doesn't anymore. I feel like we've returned to a more prude society, at least on the mainstream internet.
- advisedwang 9mo agoI don't think it's prudish to want the ability to take down deepfakes of you naked or leaked images of you.
- Dylan16807 9mo agoYour comment has basically no connection to the comment you replied to. (Which itself had a weak connection to the article, but that's a separate issue.)
- cush 9mo agoThe article is about removing non-consensual sexually explicit images and deepfakes
- ReptileMan 9mo agoAnd on whom falls the burden of proof that it is non-consensual or deepfake? We danced similar dance with DMCA takedowns.
- cush 9mo agoIt’s a small change to an existing suite of features Google provides around preventing personal information from being exposed in search results. https://myactivity.google.com/results-about-you/ https://myactivity.google.com/results-about-you/ The burden was always on the victims.
- Dylan16807 9mo agoThe article is. mlindner's comment isn't.
- etchalon 9mo ago"Please don't regulate us" step 6,438.
- dannyw 9mo agoLooks like a nice and well designed improvement that will help people. I can see this is related to the sad and ongoing ‘purification’ of the internet, but still, not going to get upset over better UX for taking down deepfakes or non-consensual explicit images which do hurt people.
- xeyownt 9mo agoSo you can pinpoint to Google what image is of high (damaging) value and Google show you more of these. What could go wrong?
- dannyw 9mo agoOh wow. Actually, that’s a really good point; I’m not sure how you could counter that (lots of regulations ~do not allow Google to hide reporting/takedown flows etc behind an account). Hopefully Google didn’t just build the world’s best deepfake search…
- nly 9mo agoWhy limited to sexual images? Why can I not control whether any kind of public image of me at all appears?
- cush 9mo agoYou can - it’s all part of their Results About You tool https://myactivity.google.com/results-about-you/ https://myactivity.google.com/results-about-you/