Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Uses Machine Learning To Remove 8.7 Million Child Exploitation Posts (techcrunch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the wiped-clean dept.

Facebook announced today in a blog post that it has removed 8.7 million posts last quarter that violated its rules against child exploitation. The company said it used new AI and machine learning technology to remove 99 percent of those posts before anyone reported them. TechCrunch reports: The new technology examines posts for child nudity and other exploitative content when they are uploaded and, if necessary, photos and accounts are reported to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Facebook had already been using photo-matching technology to compare newly uploaded photos with known images of child exploitation and revenge porn, but the new tools are meant to prevent previously unidentified content from being disseminated through its platform. The technology isn't perfect, with many parents complaining that innocuous photos of their kids have been removed. Davis addressed this in her post, writing that in order to "avoid even the potential for abuse, we take action on nonsexual content as well, like seemingly benign photos of children in the bath" and that this "comprehensive approach" is one reason Facebook removed as much content as it did last quarter. The tech isn't always right though. In 2016, it was criticized for removing content like the iconic 1972 photo of Phan Thi Kim Phuc, known as the "Napalm Girl," fleeing naked after suffering third-degree burns in a South Vietnamese napalm attack on her village. COO Sheryl Sandberg apologized for it at the time.

5 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. False positives? by nicolaiplum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is absolutely no apology or consideration from Facebook of the false positives. They just don't care that they get it wrong. They're saying that they have to destroy photo-sharing of children to save it.

    How much content did they remove that did not violate their guidelines, or was not illegal?

    Of course they focus on sex only. No mention of filtering of depiction of violence or violent content - they wouldn't want to upset the sort of President who thinks it's fine to violently assault people he dislikes or disagrees with.

    --
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled"
    1. Re:False positives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is absolutely no apology or consideration from Facebook of the false positives. They just don't care that they get it wrong. They're saying that they have to destroy photo-sharing of children to save it.

      How much content did they remove that did not violate their guidelines, or was not illegal?

      Of course they focus on sex only. No mention of filtering of depiction of violence or violent content - they wouldn't want to upset the sort of President who thinks it's fine to violently assault people he dislikes or disagrees with.

      OH FUCK YOU!!

      Where the fuck were you when Rand Paul got assaulted?

      Where the fuck were you when Steve Scalise got shot?

      Hell, where the fuck were you when Joe Biden said Mitt Romney would put black Americans "back in chains"?

      Where the fuck were you when Democrats dehumanized Republicans - over the past fucking decades?

      YOU KEPT YOUR FUCKING PIE HOLE SHUT WHEN ALL THAT HAPPENED?

      YOU ACCEPTED THAT COMPLETE BULLSHIT FROM "YOUR SIDE"?

      THAT'S HOW YOU FUCKING GOT TRUMP

      NOW YOU GET TO SEE HOW IT FUCKING FEELS.

      FUCK YOU AND THE HORSE YOU RODE IN ON

    2. Re: False positives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you call yourself anti-fascist, but then adopt the tactics of fascists - what does that make you?
      If you use violence to try and silence others who are using words - what does that make you? (Those others may also use violence too, but I am talking specifically about times when they were using words, and antifa used violence)
      If you hide your identity rather than stand behind your ideals and actions - what does that make you?
      If you engage in avoidable street brawls and then try to shape the narrative to portray yourselves only as victims of injustice, what does that make you?

      There are real social issues that need to be tackled, but antifa is not the way to do it - it seems to me that most of those folks are just looking for an outlet for pent up feelings of rage and powerlessness - and street brawling gives them that outlet. It also seems to me that in many cases the rage and powerlessness come from personal issues in their own lives, and have nothing to do with the causes for which they claim to fight.

    3. Re:False positives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually I'm all for kids not being on Facebook at all. They aren't old enough to get consent that their likeness is now on the internet forever.

    4. Re: False positives? by jpaine619 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      .....but it sounds like you were equating antifa with pro-fascism. You do know it's short for anti-fascist, right?

      Ironic isn't it.. Kind of like how North Korea refers to itself as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. If you think Antifa are anti-fascist you are a mouth breathing retard.

      Their tactics and philosophy appear, for all intents and purposes, to be modeled after the brown shirts.