Olives @olives@qoto.org

@dragestil@hostux.social I think I already removed this post, as there wasn't that much there.

@Melpomene@erisly.social It might be one of those cases where they try to be "apolitical", and consequently, wind up underenforcing their policies somewhere. The decision also indicates that Facebook might not enforce this policy, when someone isn't "using AI":

"The Board agrees with Meta that the content does not violate the company’s Manipulated Media policy because the clip does not show President Biden saying words he did not say, and it was not altered through AI. The current policy only prohibits edited videos showing people saying words they did not say (there is no prohibition covering individuals doing something they did not do) and only applies to video created through AI."

It is strangely specific.

Facebook might be going ahead with "labelling" following this particular case.

@Melpomene@erisly.social I think quite a few of these companies have a vaguer public policy, and a more specific private one which they give to moderators (there are a few possible good reasons for this, but I suspect it also lets them sweep gaffes under the carpet by *quietly changing the policy* and acting as if it was always that way).

I think it is more a matter of transparency, or the policy being misleading, than a matter of moderation.

It can also be subjective, and might lead to someone splitting hairs over each decision, which runs against the intention of 230. In this Biden case, it feels easier to handle, because they probably announced it months in advance, collected comments, and made an announcement. How many decisions do they make a day other than it?

@KatS @echo_pbreyer
Maybe. In regards to porn, I'm seeing quite a few exaggerations. For instance, that it might be related to crime.

When it comes to crime:

https://qoto.org/@olives/110462274531891870 (contains summary + link)
American scientists carried out a meta analysis of 59 studies. They found porn isn't associated with crime. A meta analysis is a study where someone studies studies.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/all-about-sex/201601/evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault
There are even studies (across the United States, Japan, Finland, and more) showing porn is associated with less crime, even among criminals.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31432547/
Nor did it seem to be the case among adolescents (the meta analysis also points to that) in this Croatian study. Here, the minors who used more porn engaged in less sexual aggression.

This seems to be one of those areas where people are eager to look for "links" between porn and something bad, and the substance of the "link" tends to be bad.

@glynmoody As these sorts of things tend to be very centralized, I could see it putting a further strain on local water stocks.

A lot of the time, "AI" doesn't add a whole lot of value for the user. There are a few uses which are cool but it probably isn't going to be a big revolution.