[HN Gopher] Ex-Meta employee says his warnings of Instagram's ha...
___________________________________________________________________
Ex-Meta employee says his warnings of Instagram's harm to teens
were ignored
Author : curiousObject
Score : 74 points
Date : 2023-11-07 21:46 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| CSMastermind wrote:
| Recently I've been getting shown lots of deepfake ads on
| Facebook. I report them but then I get back a message saying that
| they don't violate the advertising guidelines. There's no option
| to report it specifically for being a deepfake.
|
| I imagine this is a similar problem that Meta won't address until
| they're forced to.
| lozenge wrote:
| Is it a fake of a recognisable person? What are they
| endorsing/promoting?
|
| I don't see the issue with using AI to generate video ads.
| Sure, it makes it unreasonably cheap to produce video. But the
| cost of displaying the ad is the main cost anyway.
| greenthrow wrote:
| The use of the term deepfake implies it was of a recognizable
| person. That's illegal.
| generic92034 wrote:
| And if that person has agreed, getting paid for the
| permission? It would be way more expensive to get
| $celebrity to have a shooting in a remote location compared
| to calling them/their agent for a permission. And the
| result could be comparable.
| CSMastermind wrote:
| Yes: Joe Rogan, Donald Trump, and Mr. Beast are the ones I've
| reported so far.
|
| One of them was a pill that supposedly grew your penis,
| another was for some conspiracy theory site, and one was just
| a straight up phishing/scam attempt.
|
| Here's one of the products:
|
| https://thepatriotsdigest.co/code-red-blackout
|
| Here's one of the ads:
|
| https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?active_status=all&ad_t.
| ..
|
| Apparently all of these were somehow reviewed by a human and
| determined to be within Facebooks guidelines.
| willsmith72 wrote:
| Yeah don't these all supposedly go through a review
| process? How does that go through?
|
| A team of facebook engineers could write an AI to at least
| flag that stuff for manual review in under a day.
| hanniabu wrote:
| The review process is just checking whether they're a
| paying customer
| ToucanLoucan wrote:
| I commented a few weeks ago on something saying this was
| exactly what generated video was going to really take off in.
| Now you don't even need to pay the minimum wage for a
| struggling actor to endorse whatever thing you're trying to
| make: now you can just generate someone doing it. Or you know,
| a famous person.
|
| Personally, going forward, this is going to be an automatic
| disqualification for me for any product or service. If you
| can't even be fucked to hire an actor, I'd imagine you can't be
| fucked to build whatever it is correctly either. No sale. I
| don't assume this will be a tectonic shift in my consumption
| habits anyway. I don't buy shit from instagram ads and the like
| and I have a feeling that's where this is going to really take
| off, but still.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| On the other hand, maybe if they are efficient with their
| ads, perhaps they have more budget to put into the product
| instead of the marketing.
|
| I would rather buy a product that put 90% of the budget into
| the product and 10% to ads as opposed to 50%/50%.
|
| But I'm sure, they will first A/B test this with real actors
| to see what the results are before they decide on the course.
| ToucanLoucan wrote:
| The problem is there's no way to differentiate on the
| consumer's end from well-prioritized internal spend while
| responsibly assuring quality where required, and just being
| a cheap ass business operator who's nickel and dimeing his
| own products into shit.
|
| It feels like everywhere you look online is nothing but
| scams and grift now. Everyone out to fleece everyone else
| with minimum viable products. Nonsense letter combinations
| masquerading as brands all over Amazon hocking aliexpress
| garbage with poorly photoshopped product images comes to
| mind immediately.
| lawlessone wrote:
| I found an entire company of 50 or so fake people called "AI
| FIRE" All the same bio. All generated images. Reported multiple
| profiles as fake LinkedIn as fake.
|
| I only got halfway before it stopped letting me report.
|
| Now LinkedIn doesn't let me report things anymore. It just
| gives me an "unknown error" message.
|
| *AI FIRE, i got it backwards.
|
| All the fake accounts remain. Because it's not in LinkedIns
| interest to reduce their usercount.
| jfim wrote:
| Do you have a link to the company? I'll see if I can report
| it as a LNKD alumni.
| lawlessone wrote:
| Sure, check the people images and bios
| https://www.linkedin.com/company/aifireco/people/
| gravitate wrote:
| > There's no option to report it specifically for being a
| deepfake
|
| FB/Instagram is fueled by AI. It makes them money. They're not
| going to see this kind of 'pink slime' content as being a
| hindrance.
| k12sosse wrote:
| BACK IN MY DAY.. the flip phone, t9 input, 320x200 screens were
| pinnacle of mobile tech, and I longed for a future which started
| in 2006 with the release of the iPhone. Now, as a dad of a 15
| year old girl, I am crushed that the ecosystem our generations
| helped build - with good intentions - rules her and her friends
| life from waking hour to doomscrolling pre-bed ritual.
|
| It doesn't help being in a shared custody situation. Where my
| voice was ignored when it came to introducing the device to her
| in the first place (aware of some of the dangers that lurked at
| that time). My ex (her mom) are in a very amicable post-
| relationship, but we just couldn't agree on the "own phone"
| thing. Too early. After she's driving age. If she can't legally
| enlist she shouldn't be connected to the hyperverse. She can't
| decide what's right and smart, just what she thinks is right and
| smart.
|
| One very important thought is to remember that these low life-
| experience minors just don't have the experience and mental
| faculty to deal with low quality bait the same way as those who
| have come before her and grew up seeing the dastardly intentions
| of people. They are still very naive, and the power imbalance of
| bullshit detection.
|
| Anyway, I don't think I have a point here except to say I am
| ashamed for my role in bringing the pervasive mobile device
| reality to fruition, no matter how small a role I may have played
| in it. At least how it stands, now. At this point I wish there
| were alternatives to "the internet" that work alongside and
| identically to it, but with more controls and regulation to
| protect minors.
|
| That's not to say there shouldn't be a regular internet
| coexisting, but one where our devices can choose what network to
| operate near identically on, but has more accountability.
|
| More than one kid in our large district has been catfished and
| had their nudes leak and criminal investigations that lead
| nowhere.
|
| One kid has tried to start a fight online and wound up paralyzed.
|
| These are sub-16 aged minors playing hardball with the pros.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| Meta seem to especially profit off the mental exploitation of
| our elderly parents, and our young teens. Evil sandwich with a
| pissed-off GenX inbetween.
| sroussey wrote:
| I dunno... I find that teenagers are far better at discerning
| low quality online content then their grandparents.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| The popularity of TikTok/Instagram's unskippable garbage
| video players makes me think otherwise.
|
| I get sent links to videos that are cropped from landscape to
| portrait back to landscape. The videos have irrelevant emoji
| all over them. They are even split in half, showing two
| separate videos at the same time (I presume in case you lose
| interest with one).
|
| Mind boggling as someone that grew up seeing the advent of
| streaming high definition video, with the ability to skip
| around, adjust the playback speed, subtitle, etc.
| Loughla wrote:
| I absolutely do in certain situations but not in others.
|
| Older folks are more wary of trusting strangers, but way more
| willing to believe bullshit if it agrees with their
| established worldviews.
|
| Whereas teens are SHOCKINGLY willing to trust strangers on
| the internet with deeply personal content, like nudes and
| mental health or medical stuff.
| zlg_codes wrote:
| The issue is they aren't as good at it as their _parents_ ,
| i.e. older millennials and Gen X. There's this expectation
| that younger generations are just better at tech due to being
| young, because a considerable portion of Gen X and
| Millennials were enthusiastic and hopeful about technology,
| and so embraced it and the Internet when they were younger.
|
| The risks are certainly a bit more dire these days than back
| in the 80s and 90s, but there was also just a more careful
| culture. Platforms these days want you to share everything,
| and so kids just fall for it because they want genuine
| connection... but can't find it.
| autoexec wrote:
| teenagers can be good at detecting low quality content, but
| they aren't very good at knowing when they're being
| advertised to (https://theamericangenius.com/business-
| marketing/teens-cant-...) and they're basically wired to be
| impulsive and make poor choices. The parts of their brains
| that let them evaluate long term consequences is still being
| developed. (https://www.healthline.com/health/teen-brain-
| development) It's why they are so vulnerable to oversharing
| (including passing around nudes). Companies who profit from
| collecting data and pushing ads exploit teens and children
| because they are so vulnerable.
| hfjjbf wrote:
| The roots of all this stretch back decades. Whereas the US
| allowed unhealthy foods and cigarettes to advertise using
| cartoon characters, and still do, other countries introduced
| strict prohibitions on such activities. While Joe Camel is a
| thing of the past, Ronald McDonald is happily sheparding a
| pediatric obesity crisis.
|
| Which is all to say none of this is the result of a "broken"
| system, it's the result of a well designed evil system.
|
| Technologists weren't "trying" to build these systems, but
| happily devoted their lives to advertising without knowing jack
| shit about the industry or its effects on society.
| footy wrote:
| > One kid has tried to start a fight online and wound up
| paralyzed.
|
| Jesus Christ. The catfishing thing is bad too, but not
| surprising by now. This is a new kind of heartbreaking thing.
| louison11 wrote:
| I think digital addiction is currently the most pervasive
| public health issue that is also the least recognized. Sure, we
| made documentaries like the social dilemma... But whatever...
| the numbers speak for themselves. Teenagers in the US spend an
| avg 8 hours/day on the screen.
|
| In this industry people are quick to say "but it's a tool! It
| depends on how people use it!" But the reality is that we very
| well know how some specific demographics use it, and we know
| it's overall not good. Both because of the addictive component,
| and the bullying/graphic content, etc.
| Aerbil313 wrote:
| > Teenagers in the US spend an avg 8 hours/day on the screen.
|
| That's shocking! How do people survive over there, wasting a
| third of their lifetimes and their mental and physical health
| as well in the process?
|
| only ~%20 joking...
| purpleblue wrote:
| Can't all the social media companies put comments through a
| sentiment analyzer before they post, and determine if the poster
| is writing something anti-social? "Get back in the kitchen"
| should easily be analyzable through sentiment analysis, and the
| poster should just get banned. Stuff like this should be low-
| hanging fruit in my opinion, given what AI can do these days.
| ValleZ wrote:
| Next step is to ban your google account when you send something
| that can be classified as not positive, right?
| dudul wrote:
| Can't tell if the suggestion is serious but I'll bite: how do
| you distinguish from jokes/sarcasm?
|
| Not everybody knows how to use /s or jk.
| alwaysrunning wrote:
| Or bothers too. This sounds like something I would say to my
| wife, who doesn't cook and I usually put the dishes away, but
| bc it's an inside joke between us and close family/friends I
| would get banned for it.
| tetromino_ wrote:
| Your post contains the substring "get back in the kitchen".
| Would you expect to be banned for it?
|
| If your immediate reaction is along the lines of "surely
| sentiment analysis will analyze all the other words in my post"
| - consider what happens if your post is split into multiple
| posts. Some of which, perhaps, are images or gifs rather than
| words. And some of which refer to pre-existing context between
| the two people communicating and of which the sentiment
| analysis cannot possibly be aware.
| pydry wrote:
| Honestly I dont even think humans are that good at it
| sometimes.
|
| Anyway, I should get back in the kitchen. I have vegetables
| to chop.
| swatcoder wrote:
| Now, what if they could recognize "anti-social" content but
| _also_ found that it was the secret sauce to engagement and
| played a major role in making their unimaginably large business
| viable? Do you think they 'd ban users or maybe do something
| else?
| Aerbil313 wrote:
| Everyone, read the articles in Jonathan Haidt's substack. He has
| done an enormous amount of amazing work on the topic.
|
| Results speak for themselves:
| https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/13-explanations-mental-...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-07 23:01 UTC)