Technology

59219 readers

2836 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

543

UK Trial: Pornhub's Chatbot Halts Millions from Accessing Child Abuse Content (www.wired.com)

submitted 8 months ago by Squire1039@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world

246 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A trial program conducted by Pornhub in collaboration with UK-based child protection organizations aimed to deter users from searching for child abuse material (CSAM) on its website. Whenever CSAM-related terms were searched, a warning message and a chatbot appeared, directing users to support services. The trial reported a significant reduction in CSAM searches and an increase in users seeking help. Despite some limitations in data and complexity, the chatbot showed promise in deterring illegal behavior online. While the trial has ended, the chatbot and warnings remain active on Pornhub's UK site, with hopes for similar measures across other platforms to create a safer internet environment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] archomrade@midwest.social -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm going to go ahead and treat this as if it's an earnest comparison because there shouldn't be any room for ambiguity:

Fuck right off with that analogy. Pedophilia and the sexual behaviors that result from it are immensely damaging to children - who cannot meaningfully consent to sexual relationships -, whereas the sexual behaviors between consenting adults are not.

I don't really care if you were speaking in-jest. If you were, i'd recommend you delete that comment before someone takes it seriously.

[–] _cnt0@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Yah ... I already answered that: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/9541949

but this is a painfully ignorant and insulting comparison

Only if you condemn the disposition and not its inacceptable form of execution. From where I stand being attracted to children is as acceptable as men being attracted to men. Abusing children is as inacceptable as men raping men. If it is, in your book, fine to condemn pedophiles for being pedophile, then christian fundamentalists are totally fine hating homosexuals for being homosexual. Don't get me wrong, I'm neither condoning nor encouraging the (sexual) abuse of children. Unlike you I'm just not a hypocrite about different sexual orientations/preferences that nobody chooses. The only qualitative difference is that in one case one side cannot consent and needs better protection by society. The only point I am (consistently) trying to make here, is that I find it highly dubious that the measures described in the article have any impact on said required protection, and that the article completely fails to provide any shred of evidence or even indication that it does.