Facebook Developing AI To Flag Offensive Live Videos

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Facebook, a company that isn't capable of identifying fake news and removes its own CEO's posts "on accident," is developing artificial intelligence to flag offensive live videos. Holy crap, this is going to be hilarious! Pass the popcorn please. :D

Facebook Inc (FB.O) is working on automatically flagging offensive material in live video streams, building on a growing effort to use artificial intelligence to monitor content, said Joaquin Candela, the company’s director of applied machine learning.
 
Don't blame Facebook for doing whatever they want. Blame the people who actually choose to put their content on Facebook.
 
offensive speech is often protected under 1st amendment, just another censorship tool
 
I'm curious on the technology behind this. For me one of the most offensive subjects is assassination videos. I don't know how an AI would figure out that is offensive (gunshot vs beheading vs hanging, etc).
 
More importantly, how will they be able to sort out live cooking shows depicting fruits and vegetables versus porn videos? For example, I'll bet this would trigger the offensive flag if done live:

 
they should have hired microsoft to develop the ai, now that would be something :p
 
mcravenufo said:
I'm curious on the technology behind this. For me one of the most offensive subjects is assassination videos. I don't know how an AI would figure out that is offensive (gunshot vs beheading vs hanging, etc).
Click to expand...
And what about those of us who want to see that? Instead of limiting what others can see, why not just ignore what you don't want to see?
Flag the videos as 18+ and move one. Stop trying to police everything and further propagate the nanny state, thus encouraging censorship, safe places, PC everywhere.
If you don't like seeing it, don't look at it.
 
the fake news on hugh hefner is really fake, he is not that sick. Source ("Hugh Hefner is firing back after reports claim the Playboy founder is super sick"). I guess NY time does indeed post fake news (not all but some), so shame on them. Facebook may have remove his post by mistake, cause the computer system automatically finds and remove stuff, but the news is indeed fake. I don't know how they can pull off the offensive videos, but I am sure they can, their staff has some very smart programmers.
 
arthur_tuxedo said:
The first amendment only applies to government censorship. Private companies can censor whatever they want
Click to expand...
The only principles to follow are ones written in laws? If we made killing someone who stepped on your toe, legal, would it then suddenly become right and moral to do so?

The other point, Facebook has a monopoly position and therefore can be held to a higher standard. Yes the fault is the fault of their users. And no, its customers aren't the users, but advertisers. When they don't have a choice through no fault of their own, some mitigation does not seem out of line.
 
arthur_tuxedo said:
The first amendment only applies to government censorship. Private companies can censor whatever they want
Click to expand...

what law says that, i would think governments purpose would be to protect our rights, not partake in violating them with the big business
 
buhbuhfet said:
what law says that, i would think governments purpose would be to protect our rights, not partake in violating them with the big business
Click to expand...

Facebook is protected from the government telling them how to run their business. You have no rights on facebook, or this forum, or inside my house for that matter. The same way that I can toss you out of my house for having an opinion I don't agree with, facebook is allowed to do the same. The government will just have no part in it and that is what freedom of speech is providing you.
 
jpm100 said:
The only principles to follow are ones written in laws? If we made killing someone who stepped on your toe, legal, would it then suddenly become right and moral to do so?

The other point, Facebook has a monopoly position and therefore can be held to a higher standard. Yes the fault is the fault of their users. And no, its customers aren't the users, but advertisers. When they don't have a choice through no fault of their own, some mitigation does not seem out of line.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. If the companies that control the platforms of expression get together and decide to censor speech, that's the same as the government doing it and we should have a national discussion about it. I was just pointing out that the First Amendment does not apply to private companies and therefore does not give people the right to say whatever they want on Facebook (or HardOCP or wherever) without being flagged / banned / etc. A lot of people make that mistake.
 
Jarod888 said:
And what about those of us who want to see that? Instead of limiting what others can see, why not just ignore what you don't want to see?
Flag the videos as 18+ and move one. Stop trying to police everything and further propagate the nanny state, thus encouraging censorship, safe places, PC everywhere.
If you don't like seeing it, don't look at it.
Click to expand...

I agree. But, like HardForum, there are rules. Facebook has theirs. If it's Facebook that's doing the limiting, I'm fine with it. If it's at the direction of the US Government, I'd be against it...

I'm just waiting for the 1 or 2 videos that get falsely flagged and it becomes a huge deal and is called a failure. 1 or 2 out of millions.
 
The real question is offensive to who? What I find offensive and what others find offensive aren't going to match. What the average public finds offensive and what small groups find offensive won't match. Some people are going to find anything related to blacks and gays offensive. Will they be removed from live streams? How about anyone that isn't Christian? What about a 12 year old being allowed to play in his backyard without at least 5 adults watching them? What about a family on vacation at sea world or a zoo? There is somebody out there now that is offended about everything so where do you start drawing lines over what you will flag vs won't flag?

buhbuhfet said:
what law says that, i would think governments purpose would be to protect our rights, not partake in violating them with the big business
Click to expand...

Damn you are an idiot. I think I lost a few IQ points just reading your post in this thread.

The first amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"

Or in English for you. Congress can not make laws that make it illegal to practice religion, state your opinion, publish the news, have a group of people meet to discuss topics or ask the government to make a change.

However like most partly educated people out there, that gets twisted somehow into sites can't keep you from doing what you want. Facebook, hardocp and any other private company has full rights to prohibit whatever they want. If Hardocp doesn't want you to discuss a topic you can't discuss it. That has not a single thing to do with the first amendment since these sites are not congress and there is no law that states "from this day forward hardocp.com will be required to do <insert action>"

The government is not going to get involved with site wanting to limit what you can and can't post, nor will it get involved with making it illegal for sites to regulate their content and put it behind age gates or pay gates. As they don't care nor should they care.
 
jpm100 said:
The only principles to follow are ones written in laws? If we made killing someone who stepped on your toe, legal, would it then suddenly become right and moral to do so?

The other point, Facebook has a monopoly position and therefore can be held to a higher standard. Yes the fault is the fault of their users. And no, its customers aren't the users, but advertisers. When they don't have a choice through no fault of their own, some mitigation does not seem out of line.
Click to expand...

Facebook does not remotely have a monopoly position in anything. Not even in their most successful business, advertising, much less anything that would infringe on your freedoms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top