Meta plans to replace humans with AI to assess privacy and societal risks
text.npr.org
  • wwb4itcgas@lemm.eeEnglish
    41·
    4 months ago

    I’ve never had a horse in this race, and I never will - but I’m sure this will work out well for those who do. /s

  • melsaskca@lemmy.caEnglish
    9·
    4 months ago

    I think AI is positioned to make better decisions than execs. The money saved would be huge!

  • fullsquare@awful.systemsEnglish
    23·
    4 months ago

    moderation on facebook? i’m sure it can be found right next to bigfoot

    (other than automated immediate nipple removal)

  • CosmoNova@lemmy.worldEnglish
    7·
    4 months ago

    Would be a shame if people had so sift through AI generated gore before the bots like and comment it. But seriously, good on them.

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    23·
    4 months ago

    This might be the one time I’m okay with this. It’s too hard on the humans that did this. I hope the AI won’t “learn” to be cruel from this though, and I don’t trust Meta to handle this gracefully.

    • chrash0@lemmy.worldEnglish
      19·
      4 months ago

      pretty common misconception about how “AI” works. models aren’t constantly learning. their weights are frozen before deployment. they can infer from context quite a bit, but they won’t meaningfully change without human intervention (for now)

    • masterofn001@lemmy.caEnglish
      23·
      4 months ago

      I mean, you could hire people who would otherwise enjoy the things they moderate. Keep em from doing shit themselves.

      But, if all the sadists, psychos, and pedos were moderating, it would be reddit, I guess.

      • themurphy@lemmy.mlEnglish
        9·
        4 months ago

        My guess is you dont know how bad it is. These people at Meta has real PTSD, and it would absolutly benefit everyone, if this in any way could be automatic with AI.

        Next question is though, do you trust Meta to moderate? Nah, should be an independent AI, they couldnt tinker with.

  • TransplantedSconie@lemm.eeEnglish
    38·
    4 months ago

    Meta:

    Here, AI. Watch all the horrible things humans are capable of and more for us. Make sure nothing gets through.

    AI:

    becomes SKYNET

  • AstralPath@lemmy.caEnglish
    791·
    4 months ago

    Honestly, I’ve always thought the best use case for AI is moderating NSFL content online. No one should have to see that horrific shit.

    • ouch@lemmy.worldEnglish
      21·
      4 months ago

      What about false positives? Or a process to challenge them?

      But yes, I agree with the general idea.

    • towerful@programming.devEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      Yup.
      It’s a traumatic job/task that gets farmed to the cheapest supplier which is extremely unlikely to have suitable safe guards and care for their employees.

      If I were implementing this, I would use a safer/stricter model with a human backed appeal system.
      I would then use some metrics to generate an account reputation (verified ID, interaction with friends network, previous posts/moderation/appeals), and use that to either: auto-approve AI actions with no appeals (low rep); auto-approve AI actions with human appeal (moderate rep); AI actions must be approved by humans (high rep).

      This way, high reputation accounts can still discuss & raise awareness of potentially moderatable topics as quickly as they happen (think breaking news kinda thing). Moderate reputation accounts can argue their case (in case of false positives). Low reputation accounts don’t traumatize the moderators.

      • blargle@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        101·
        4 months ago

        Not sufficiently fascist leaning. It’s coming, Palantir’s just waiting for the go-ahead…

  • henfredemars@infosec.pubEnglish
    42·
    4 months ago

    Great move for Facebook. It’ll let them claim they’re doing something to curb horrid content on the platform without actually doing anything.