I wonder why nobody is considering the most obvious solution to all this complication around what is NSFW and what is not: Children shouldn’t be on these platforms at all to begin with. They shouldn’t be anywhere near social media until age 14. Definitely not free roaming everywhere on the internet.
For us adults, I honestly cannot say whether moderation instigated by a company is better than moderation instigated by the users. The devil is in the details. This place isn’t moderated by a company and you’d probably think the moderation here is superior to Meta’s.
Pretty much all social media has a minimum age of 13 in their ToS. So what exactly are you suggesting? Raising it by 1 year?
Actually verifying it and punishing the companies if they let underaged people use it. Alcohol stores are also punished when they sell products to children.
I personally think this would help, but there’s a lot folks online who scream “free speech” when you start talking about verifying age online. And honestly, I don’t know a good solution to balance it
Raise it by 3. Under 16s shouldn’t have access to any social media.
Posts with LGBTQ+ hashtags including #lesbian, #bisexual, #gay, #trans, #queer, #nonbinary, #pansexial, #transwomen, #Tgirl, #Tboy, #Tgirlsarebeautiful, #bisexualpride, #lesbianpride, and dozens of others were hidden for any users who had their sensitive content filter turned on. Teenagers have the sensitive content filter turned on by default.
Kids wont even know what they will lose with his representation going missing on Instagram. So depressing. Wish that lizard freak the worst.
deleted by creator
Try existing in the rural parts of the country where no one is “like you”, and increasingly they claim all that “Hollywood media” is just propaganda.
Seeing people like yourself, actual real people, has a huge impact in helping kids avoid isolation and in some cases connect with communities and avoid suicide.
Feeling alone in the world is something teens are already prone to and this makes it so much worse for the LGBTQ kids out there. Their existence now being labeled on the same level as sexual content and gore.
deleted by creator
Wait, Pro-LGBT speech IS NOT allowed!?!?! Holy fucking shit, this isn’t a cesspool, it’s an execution by firing squad.
I remember there were plenty of little bitches saying that censorship won’t be turned the other way and that it allows to remove bad people from the Internet. That bad people should be censored, and Reddit\Twitter\Facebook when used for politics will not be abused by bot armies, and that censorship will not be repurposed very easily.
I was being accused of being a right-wing troll, a luddite, a retard, an incel and what not for saying that they were wrong on every point.
Yes, even bad people should not be censored. When they misbehave, they should be barred from the place they harmed, ideally not forever, but for a week or so maximum.
I’ve learned this not just in morals, but in practice, when repeatedly banned on one forum by an admin of directly opposite political views … for 24 hours max each time after multiple warnings, and only once a week or a month (can’t remember) much later when I joked about exploding Muslims. Despite that, I was (I hope) a good enough member of that forum for like 10 years after, till now. Apes waving banhammers today have something to learn from that.
But that’s not the point, the point is that even if you consider centralized censorship good, that’s how it works.
So getting back to little bitches loving censorship - where are they now and do they have anything to say?
I was in admin chat on facebook and it was blocking any posts with links to https://lemmy.world. I was talking to admins about firing up a lemmy instance and leave the FB group as a link to a lemmy community
I’m kinda shocked people still actively use Facebook.
Only ~3,000,000,000 people/month.
I would take the 3 B number with a pinch of salt. Its 3 B accounts, not unique individuals.
At one point last decade I had 11 seperate Facebook accounts, used for various purposes. They’re all deleted now, but my behaviour is not unique. There will be many, many people running multiple accounts, and don’t forget bots
Friendly reminder: Deleting your account won’t accomplish what you think it will.
Facebook will still keep all data that is associated with other users as per their own disclaimer. They also still keep logs that are "disassociated with personal identifiers. "
So all training can still occur. And understand what while Jane Smith may have deleted her account, they still have all the data it takes to indicate that User 12345 was tagged in photos with John Smith at the Burger King on 404 Fake St. And, because of that, the data that User 12345 had previously provided is ALSO John Smith’s data. And Fred Wilkerson since he was at that Burger King once. And so forth.
And ALL that data is still there for training.
So do what you gotta do to make it less appealing to other users. But understand your data is already out there and is never going away. Same with reddit and all other social media (which includes Lemmy).
deleted by creator
Yeah but you know what? That’s still better than actively engaging with their “services”.
Eventually, it’ll just be bots interacting with themselves, given enough time.
Eventually, it’ll just be bots interacting with themselves, given enough time.
It seems like that’s a good chunk of it already
Yes. Like I said. Do what you gotta do to make it less appealing to other users.
But if, for example, you are an LGBTQIA+ person who thinks this will provide any form of protection…
If you’re in the US, sure. If you’re in Europe you can compel them to completely delete everything as per the GDPR.
And I am sure a company that is now openly training their LLMs on copyrighted materials is going to totally comply with all of that…
One of these days people are going to learn “But it is against the law” doesn’t apply to the rich and powerful, law enforcement, or megacorporations.
Training LLMs on copyright material isn’t illegal to begin with, just like how learning from a pirated book isn’t or having drugs in your system isn’t, only being in possession of these things is illegal.
GDPR violations are on the other hand - illegal. You’re right in principle, don’t get me wrong and I appreciate your healthy cynicism but in this particular case being slapped with a GDPR fine is actually not worth keeping the data of one user.
Edit: Downvoted for being right as usual. Bruh Lemmy is becoming more and more like Reddit every day.
Training LLMs on copyright material isn’t illegal to begin with
Reproducing identifiable chunks of copyrighted content in the LLM’s output is copyright infringement, though, and that’s what training on copyrighted material leads to. Of course, that’s the other end of the process and it’s a tort, not a crime, so yeah, you make a good point that the company’s legal calculus could be different.
Thank you, I’m glad someone is sane ITT.
To further refine the point, do you know of any lawsuits that were ruled successfully on the basis that as you say - the company that made the LLM is responsible because someone could prompt it to reproduce identifiable chunks of copyright material? Which specific bills make it so?
Wouldn’t it be like suing Seagate because I use their hard drives to pirate corpo media? I thought Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. would serve as the basis there and just like Betamax it’d be distribution of copyright material by an end user that would be problematic, rather than the potential of a product to be used for copyright infringement.
I’m glad someone is sane ITT.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uY9z2b85qcE
To be clear, I think it ought to be the case that at least “copyleft” GPL code can’t be used to train an LLM without requiring that all output of the LLM become GPL (which, if said GPL training data were mixed with proprietary training data, would likely make the model legally unusable in total). AFAIK it’s way too soon for there to be a precedent-setting court ruling about it, though.
In particular…
I thought Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. would serve as the basis there
…I don’t see how this has any relevancy at all, since the whole purpose of an LLM is to make new – arguably derivative – works on an industrial scale, not just single copies for personal use.
No, it means all speach is welcome. Freedom of speach is a fundamental right and anyone advocating for censorship should take a long look into the mirror before calling other people fascist.
Freedom of speech isn’t a fundamental right. If you doubt this try publicly and clearly threatening people with the intent to harm. You will be prosecuted for that action.
You should avoid using words you almost cettainly do not understand which in this case is “fascist”.
