this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
767 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

63313 readers
4652 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Update: After this article was published, Bluesky restored Kabas' post and told 404 Media the following: "This was a case of our moderators applying the policy for non-consensual AI content strictly. After re-evaluating the newsworthy context, the moderation team is reinstating those posts."

Bluesky deleted a viral, AI-generated protest video in which Donald Trump is sucking on Elon Musk’s toes because its moderators said it was “non-consensual explicit material.” The video was broadcast on televisions inside the office Housing and Urban Development earlier this week, and quickly went viral on Bluesky and Twitter.

Independent journalist Marisa Kabas obtained a video from a government employee and posted it on Bluesky, where it went viral. Tuesday night, Bluesky moderators deleted the video because they said it was “non-consensual explicit material.”

Other Bluesky users said that versions of the video they uploaded were also deleted, though it is still possible to find the video on the platform.

Technically speaking, the AI video of Trump sucking Musk’s toes, which had the words “LONG LIVE THE REAL KING” shown on top of it, is a nonconsensual AI-generated video, because Trump and Musk did not agree to it. But social media platform content moderation policies have always had carve outs that allow for the criticism of powerful people, especially the world’s richest man and the literal president of the United States.

For example, we once obtained Facebook’s internal rules about sexual content for content moderators, which included broad carveouts to allow for sexual content that criticized public figures and politicians. The First Amendment, which does not apply to social media companies but is relevant considering that Bluesky told Kabas she could not use the platform to “break the law,” has essentially unlimited protection for criticizing public figures in the way this video is doing.

Content moderation has been one of Bluesky’s growing pains over the last few months. The platform has millions of users but only a few dozen employees, meaning that perfect content moderation is impossible, and a lot of it necessarily needs to be automated. This is going to lead to mistakes. But the video Kabas posted was one of the most popular posts on the platform earlier this week and resulted in a national conversation about the protest. Deleting it—whether accidentally or because its moderation rules are so strict as to not allow for this type of reporting on a protest against the President of the United States—is a problem.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 21 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (19 children)

Ah, the rewards of moderation: the best move is not to play. Fuck it is & has always been a better answer. Anarchy of the early internet was better than letting some paternalistic authority decide the right images & words to allow us to see, and decentralization isn't a bad idea.

Yet the forward-thinking people of today know better and insist that with their brave, new moderation they'll paternalize better without stopping to acknowledge how horribly broken, arbitrary, & fallible that entire approach is. Instead of learning what we already knew, social media keeps repeating the same dumb mistakes, and people clamor to the newest iteration of it.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 16 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I had to hack an ex’s account once to get the revenge porn they posted of me taken down.

There’s a balance at the end of the day.

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 10 hours ago

Illegal content has always been unprotected & subject to removal by the law. Moderation policies wouldn't necessarily remove porn presumed to be legal, either, so moderation is still a crapshoot.

Still, that sucks.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 12 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

Bluesky had better take care that they not act like other cowardly tech media

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] thisphuckinguy@lemmy.world 15 points 14 hours ago

Bluesky is BS

[–] MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world 273 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (12 children)

I guess I get it. They would not like to set precedent to allow non-consensual AI generated porn on the platform. Seems reasonable. That said, fuck Donny. The video is hilarious. It’s fine if Bluesky doesn’t host it though.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 36 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Well, looks like they put it back up. I think I agree with you though. It might be better for them to restrict this. Frankly republican incels excel at generating this kind of content and this sets the precedent that Bluesky will welcome such AI garbage. I'm not arguing that this stuff shouldn't be made in good spirit, but for a serious platform to not moderate it out I think invites chaos.

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 11 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

There's plenty of legal precedent for newsworthiness to supersede some rules in the name of the freedom of the Press. It makes sense that I'm not allowed (at least where I live) to post a non-consensual pictures of someone off the street. But it would not make sense if I was forbidden from posting a picture of the Prime Minister visiting a school for example. That's newsworthy and therefore the public interest outweighs his right to privacy.

The AI video of Trump/Musk made a bunch of headlines because it was hacked onto a government building. On top of that it's satire of public figures and – I can't believe that needs saying – is clearly not meant to provide sexual gratification.

Corpos and bureaucracies would have you believe nuance doesn't belong in moderation decisions, but that's a fallacy and an flimsy shield to hide behind to justify making absolutely terrible braindead decisions at best, and political instrumentation of rules at worst. We should celebrate any time when moderators are given latitude to not stick to dumb rules (as long as this latitude is not being used for evil), and shame any company that censors legitimate satire of the elites based on bullshit rules meant to protect the little people.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 6 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

That's a really thin line. I have a hard time imagining anyone sticking to this same argument if the satire were directed towards someone they admired in a similar position of power. The prime minister visiting a school is a world away from AI generated content of something that never actually happened. Leaving nuance out of these policies isn't some corporation pulling wool over our eyes, it's just really hard to do nuance at scale without bias and commotion.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MsPenguinette@lemmy.world 50 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Only because I find these specific videos to be quite funny, maybe there can be a "satire/criticism of a public figure" exception that could exist

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 84 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

I'll just explain why that is a horrible idea with three simple letters:

A. O. C.

[–] MsPenguinette@lemmy.world 50 points 21 hours ago

Fuck. Good point. Guess I'll just have to come to peace with me being a hypocrite when it comes to what I find acceptable.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Satire is already legal and right wingers have already called for her to be shot or worse and gotten away with it. Pandora's box isn't closed, it's long been open.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 21 points 20 hours ago (6 children)

That's a pretty big loophole. I mean, imagine the same exact video with Kamala Harris and Nancy Pelosi. It takes a significantly different subtext when the subjects are women. But the subtext doesn't really matter to the morality of the act.

Either involuntary AI generated pornography is wrong or it isn't. I think it's wrong. Do Trump and Musk deserve it? Sure, but it's still wrong. Do I feel bad for them? No, because they deserve it. But it's still not something I would do, or suggest anyone else do, and if the creator is prosecuted, I'm not going to defend them.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)
[–] demizerone@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago
[–] b3an@lemmy.world 39 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Put it on Facebook! Ol’ Zuck decided all the guardrails pretty much needed to go so. Post and do whatever. Plus, the people who should see it most are those still hanging around on Facebook 🤣

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 13 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Their moderation has been garbage lately. They're wrongly banning people for things they didn't do. It's just premusk twitter at this point. The real fediverse is a better vet medium and long term

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 52 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

fwiw they restored the post and blamed it on a moderator being too strict in applying a policy regarding non consensual ai porn. It’s objectively good they have policies banning such things but it was completely obvious from context that this was not meant to be pornographic at all

As such, one could easily read it with cynicism as responding to backlash as they only reviewed said moderators actions after this article came out and the associated clamor

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 3 points 12 hours ago

I don’t want to watch this video please

[–] sighofannoyance@lemmy.world 35 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Simple solution to all this crap:

MASTODON.

[–] Hack3900@lemy.lol 13 points 18 hours ago (5 children)

I do not understand why people use BlueSky We already had the alternative!!!!! It was here first and many had already created accounts.. Then just went back to Twitter

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 15 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

because there is zero marketing for mastodon. zero sex-appeal to mastodon.

bluesky was a better car salesman selling the same old car twitter had.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 17 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

It was far faster and easier to build up a feed of enjoyable content on BlueSky. My Mastodon feed has sat almost completely empty, and I've only been able to find a few news-reposters there.

And I'm tech-savvy. Imagine how it is for other social media users.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 12 points 16 hours ago (15 children)

Yes, exactly this. Like something might be technically better but unless it's doing its main job of actually connecting people it's not going to work.

I wish more FOSS nerds understood this.

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MysticKetchup@lemmy.world 14 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
  1. Bluesky is more easily usable
  2. More people they want to follow are on Bluesky

Instead of complaining we need to work on making Masto more welcoming to new users and amplifying the advantages it has over Bluesky

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 11 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Honestly, that ship has sailed, I think. When Musk first took over Twitter and everyone was bailing, if Mastodon was a viable alternative it could have taken off.

Now that Bluesky has overtaken them, and is seen as the alternative to Twitter, I think the opportunity has been lost.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Fiivemacs@lemmy.ca 29 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Re-upload it 100 times over..fuck em

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›