Bluesky Deletes AI Protest Video of Trump Sucking Musk's Toes, Calls It 'Non-Consensual Explicit Material'
-
Yeah I really don't like that this is probably going to end up being used to argue that deepfake porn of public figures is ok as long as it is "satire".
I don't really care about the Trump x Musk one but I know for a fact that this will lead to MAGAs doing the same shit to AOC and any other prominent woman on the democrat side.
And that would be okay
-
Bluesky will become just the same az elonx...
It already is
-
I am standing on the wire
what is the problem with satire and AOC (whatever that is)?The problem is the combination of AOC and nonconsentual explicit AI content. Overly broad rules might make that fall under satire, which is why caution is advised when devising such rules.
-
Bluesky deleted a viral, AI-generated protest video in which Donald Trump is sucking on Elon Muskās toes because its moderators said it was ānon-consensual explicit material.ā 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 ānon-consensual explicit material.ā
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 Muskās toes, which had the words āLONG LIVE THE REAL KINGā 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 worldās richest man and the literal president of the United States.
For example, we once obtained Facebookās 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 ābreak the law,ā has essentially unlimited protection for criticizing public figures in the way this video is doing.
Content moderation has been one of Blueskyās 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 itāwhether 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 Statesāis a problem.
I seem to be in the minority here, but I am extremely uncomfortable the idea of non-consensual AI porn of anyone. Even people I despise. Itās so unethical that it just disgusts me. I understand why there are exceptions for those in positions of power, but Iād be more than happy to live in a world where there werenāt.
-
I seem to be in the minority here, but I am extremely uncomfortable the idea of non-consensual AI porn of anyone. Even people I despise. Itās so unethical that it just disgusts me. I understand why there are exceptions for those in positions of power, but Iād be more than happy to live in a world where there werenāt.
Where do you draw the line for the rich fucks of the world? Realistic CGI? Realistic drawings? Edited photos?
-
Bluesky had better take care that they not act like other cowardly tech media
So you don't remember Jack Dorsey's shenanigans ?
-
I seem to be in the minority here, but I am extremely uncomfortable the idea of non-consensual AI porn of anyone. Even people I despise. Itās so unethical that it just disgusts me. I understand why there are exceptions for those in positions of power, but Iād be more than happy to live in a world where there werenāt.
Anything bad that happens to a conservative is good. The world will only get better if they are made to repeatedly suffer.
-
Where do you draw the line for the rich fucks of the world? Realistic CGI? Realistic drawings? Edited photos?
Assuming youāre asking out of genuine curiosity, for me personally, Iād draw the line somewhere along ācould this, or any frame of this, be mistaken for a real depiction of these people?ā and āif this were a depiction of real children, how hard would the FBI come down on you?ā
I understand that thatās not a practical way of creating law or moderating content, but I donāt care because Iām talking about my personal preference/comfort level. Not what I think should be policy. And frankly, I donāt know what should be policy or how to word it all in anti-loopholes lawyer-speak. I just know that this sucking toes thing crosses an ethical line for me and personally I hate it.
Putting it more idealistically: when I imagine living in utopia, non-consensual AI porn of people doesnāt exist in it. So in an effort to get closer to utopia, I disapprove of things that would not exist in an utopia.
-
I seem to be in the minority here, but I am extremely uncomfortable the idea of non-consensual AI porn of anyone. Even people I despise. Itās so unethical that it just disgusts me. I understand why there are exceptions for those in positions of power, but Iād be more than happy to live in a world where there werenāt.
I agree with you.
However...there's an argument to be made that the post itself is a form of criticism and falls under the free speech rules where it regards political figures. In many ways, it's not any different than the drawings of Musk holding Trump's puppet strings, or Putin and Trump riding a horse together. One is drawn and the other is animated, but they're the same basic concept.
I understand however that that sets a disturbing precedent for what can and cannot be acceptable. But I don't know where to draw that line. I just know that it has to be drawn somewhere.
I think...and this is my opinion...political figures are fair game for this, while there should be protections in place for private citizens, since political figures by their very ambition put themselves in the public sphere whereas private individuals do not.
-
I seem to be in the minority here, but I am extremely uncomfortable the idea of non-consensual AI porn of anyone. Even people I despise. Itās so unethical that it just disgusts me. I understand why there are exceptions for those in positions of power, but Iād be more than happy to live in a world where there werenāt.
In my country the laws about publishing photos etc are different for anyone an "people of public interest". So yeah imo it should be okay to create cartoons or whatever of politicians without their permission - not porn ofc. Including ai generated stuff, but that one should be marked as such , given how realistic it is now
-
Anything bad that happens to a conservative is good. The world will only get better if they are made to repeatedly suffer.
No, we cannot think like that. It is true that fascism cannot be beat peacefully, but we should never want them to suffer. We should always strive to crush their fascist oligarchy with as little suffering ss possible.
"Whoever would be a slayer of monsters must take heed, or they may become the very monsters they slay... For when one peers into the abyss, the abyss peers back into thee" -FN
-
You clearly never were the victim back in those days. Neither do you realize this approach doesn't work on the modern web even in the slightest, unless you want the basics of both enlightenment and therefore science and democracy crumbling down even faster.
Anarchism is never an answer, it's usually willful ignorance about there being any problems.
Anarchism is never an answer, it's usually willful ignorance about there being any problems.
AnCaps drive me nuts. They want to dismantle democratic institutions while simultaneously licking the boots of unelected institutions.
-
Put it on Facebook! Olā 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
Ugh but then I'd have to use Facebook
-
No, we cannot think like that. It is true that fascism cannot be beat peacefully, but we should never want them to suffer. We should always strive to crush their fascist oligarchy with as little suffering ss possible.
"Whoever would be a slayer of monsters must take heed, or they may become the very monsters they slay... For when one peers into the abyss, the abyss peers back into thee" -FN
They don't believe anything they aren't experiencing first hand is actually a problem.
As much as I don't like it, they have clearly made their own personal suffering a prerequisite for any solutions being allowed to move forward
-
Many FOSS nerds don't even understand the necessity of a user-friendly GUIā¦
Some of them will actively advocate for user-unfriendliness to keep out the noobs which... I mean the number of psy-ops in the community has to be non-zero.
-
Where do you draw the line for the rich fucks of the world? Realistic CGI? Realistic drawings? Edited photos?
This is what I was thinking about myself. Because we're cool with political caricatures, right?
I guess the problem is that nobody wants to feature in non-consensual AI porn. I mean if you'd want to draw me getting shafted by Musk, that'd be weird, but a highly realistic video of the same event, that would be hard to explain to the missus.
-
Bluesky deleted a viral, AI-generated protest video in which Donald Trump is sucking on Elon Muskās toes because its moderators said it was ānon-consensual explicit material.ā 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 ānon-consensual explicit material.ā
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 Muskās toes, which had the words āLONG LIVE THE REAL KINGā 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 worldās richest man and the literal president of the United States.
For example, we once obtained Facebookās 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 ābreak the law,ā has essentially unlimited protection for criticizing public figures in the way this video is doing.
Content moderation has been one of Blueskyās 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 itāwhether 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 Statesāis a problem.
Correct. this is indeed the correct decision to remove the thing.
BUT i have a feeling that this quick reaction does not compare to the speed of decision for normal people, especially women who get this kind of stuff made about them.Also, note that I'm not saying it was bad to make the video, or have it run in public on hacked screens.
That is perfectly fine political commentary, by means of civil disobedience.Just that Bluesky is correct in it's action to remove it from their service.
-
Anarchism is never an answer, it's usually willful ignorance about there being any problems.
AnCaps drive me nuts. They want to dismantle democratic institutions while simultaneously licking the boots of unelected institutions.
I guess I don't really consider AnCaps to be Anarchists because Anarchy is generally leftist philosophy. Traditional anarchy is like small government socialism: empowered local unions and city governments.
-
No, we cannot think like that. It is true that fascism cannot be beat peacefully, but we should never want them to suffer. We should always strive to crush their fascist oligarchy with as little suffering ss possible.
"Whoever would be a slayer of monsters must take heed, or they may become the very monsters they slay... For when one peers into the abyss, the abyss peers back into thee" -FN
It is true that fascism cannot be beat peacefully, but we should never want them to suffer
This is true. We should rapidly give them a lead injection, rather than have them suffer.
-
You clearly never were the victim back in those days. Neither do you realize this approach doesn't work on the modern web even in the slightest, unless you want the basics of both enlightenment and therefore science and democracy crumbling down even faster.
Anarchism is never an answer, it's usually willful ignorance about there being any problems.
Anarchism is never an answer
This isn't anarchism, as described. Anarchism, like actual anarchism, is the only likely solution, imo. No gods, no masters, no idols.
