Bluesky Deletes AI Protest Video of Trump Sucking Musk's Toes, Calls It 'Non-Consensual Explicit Material'
-
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.
Why is it "very very stupid"?
-
Yeah I hate Musk and Trump for lots of things. I don't think using "haha they might be kissing each other! Musk sucks Trumps dick!" is somehow effective criticism of actual fascists in office.
Maybe we can criticize and protest and organize without using shit rooted in queerphobia. Might as well just say "Well Trump probably cross dresses, that shows him!"
-
I'm not here to discuss how we need to be ethical in response to a fascist takeover. So we gotta play by the rules but they don't?
-
Yeah. The means must absolutely align with the ends, and this video reeks of privileged white guy mad that he got his cushy desk job in DC ripped out from under him.
Whoever made this shit is no comrade and I'm sick of liberals sharing this everywhere
"You're not protesting the right way! You have to stand up to them only in ways that are acceptable to me!"
Got it buddy.
-
Bluesky will become just the same az elonx...
It's been restored after the article published. Moderators removed it as it being "Non-consensual" due to their rules, which they were right to follow....but the exception is that this is "news-worthy" which I agree with.
-
A perfect breeding ground for growing localized power structures that aren't bound to anything holding them back.
A power vacuum will always fill itself. To gain control over it as a society (i.e. democracy) is one of the greatest achievements of mankind. We have to keep improving it (by reforming how economical powers can or can not exercise power or grow), not moving to something that's so obviously disregarding how power structures form and behave in human societies.A perfect breeding ground for growing localized power structures that aren’t bound to anything holding them back
Ok, read up a little about anarchism, and come back to the discussion. I can provide a starter primer, if you like.
To gain control over it as a society (i.e. democracy) is one of the greatest achievements of mankind.
The only control is the ruling class over the working class. I don't think that's a great achievement.
-
"You're not protesting the right way! You have to stand up to them only in ways that are acceptable to me!"
Got it buddy.
A protest is throwing a brick through a window. This ain't no protest.
-
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.
I'm confused as to why this 404media story neglected to link to the post in question.
to get from this article to the post that it is about, i had to type in the bsky username from the screenshot and scroll through the timeline. to save others the effort:
https://bsky.app/profile/marisakabas.bsky.social/post/3liwlwvvq6k2s is the post which was removed.
https://bsky.app/profile/marisakabas.bsky.social/post/3lj3yrzc6is2p is the thread about it being removed and later restored.
-
You need some kind of moderation for user generated content, even if it’s only to comply with takedowns related to law (and I’m not talking about DCMA).
Well, yes: gotta comply with the law.
Legal violations are often quite clear, and removing illegal content is justifiable.
Can't fault anyone for following the law.It's the extra moderation that's problematic.
People yearning for their corporate authorities to command the right words & images to appear on a screen & calling that progress feels quite backward like our ancestors fought so hard to gain these freedoms that our spoiled generation will so easily cede away to some nobodies at the slightest often imaginary inconvenience. -
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. It’s so unethical that it just disgusts me. I understand why there are exceptions for those in positions of power, but I’d be more than happy to live in a world where there weren’t.
You should grow up.
-
A protest is throwing a brick through a window. This ain't no protest.
It is unanimously considered a protest. Why do you think you decide, not the people?
-
please stop being weird and gross
also please no more 'look bad person do gay' content
You needlessly choose to take offence. It shows who is sub and who dom. It doesn't matter, except to you it seems, what sex they have
-
It is unanimously considered a protest. Why do you think you decide, not the people?
Cause people are fucking stupid. You're a great example
-
I don’t know, man. Seems to me conservatives let shit like that fester, while ignoring it (or further festering it) while they do the real dirty work in buried headlines.
They let us have the fun while they quietly pull everything out from under us.
But, at the same time, it’s just going to happen. People are frustrated with very little perceived outlet.
Let me use another example: calling them "weird".
It doesn't matter to a rational person if another person calls them weird.
It matters to Reich wingers, who base their whole self identity on "matching the ideal".
-
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.
Pretty much everyone used anonymous handles, so it was hard to be a victim, and very easy to disregard junk we didn't like.
I'm sensing strong overtones of a victim complex and excessive catastrophizing.
You know they're images & words on a screen, right?Enlightenment gives us freedom of expression.
It seems uninformed & backward to assume faceless moderators of some private organization are the defenders of enlightenment, freedom, & democracy (especially while arguing against too much freedom).
Centralized moderation & curation algorithms got us filter bubbles & echo chambers personalizing the information people consume & distorting their perceptions.
It feeds people the information they want to see (often polarizing them with extremist ideas), keeping users engaged on the platform so it continues earning a steady stream of ad revenue.
Rather than defend enlightened principles of society, moderators serve their own interests, which aren't necessarily in alignment with anything noble.Internet anarchy is a pretty good answer.
-
A perfect breeding ground for growing localized power structures that aren’t bound to anything holding them back
Ok, read up a little about anarchism, and come back to the discussion. I can provide a starter primer, if you like.
To gain control over it as a society (i.e. democracy) is one of the greatest achievements of mankind.
The only control is the ruling class over the working class. I don't think that's a great achievement.
The only control is the ruling class over the working class. I don’t think that’s a great achievement.
That's a result of systems like capitalism, not democracy in itself.
Read up a little about the concept of democracy (and what isn't part of it) and come back to the discussion. -
The only control is the ruling class over the working class. I don’t think that’s a great achievement.
That's a result of systems like capitalism, not democracy in itself.
Read up a little about the concept of democracy (and what isn't part of it) and come back to the discussion.True democracy, or majoritarianism?
-
Pretty much everyone used anonymous handles, so it was hard to be a victim, and very easy to disregard junk we didn't like.
I'm sensing strong overtones of a victim complex and excessive catastrophizing.
You know they're images & words on a screen, right?Enlightenment gives us freedom of expression.
It seems uninformed & backward to assume faceless moderators of some private organization are the defenders of enlightenment, freedom, & democracy (especially while arguing against too much freedom).
Centralized moderation & curation algorithms got us filter bubbles & echo chambers personalizing the information people consume & distorting their perceptions.
It feeds people the information they want to see (often polarizing them with extremist ideas), keeping users engaged on the platform so it continues earning a steady stream of ad revenue.
Rather than defend enlightened principles of society, moderators serve their own interests, which aren't necessarily in alignment with anything noble.Internet anarchy is a pretty good answer.
Dude, you do realize I didn't endorse centralized moderation with a single word, let alone social algorithms or any of the other trash? I'm just not ignorant enough to believe the internet wouldn't become an utter pile of trash without any kind of moderation of oversight, especially with such an abundance of ways to spread nonsense fully automatically. Want to get a glimpse of how that would look like? Look at Nostr.
Given you're literally starting off with ad hominem any discussion with you is pointless anyway though. -
I don’t think using “haha they might be kissing each other! Musk sucks Trumps dick!” is somehow effective criticism of actual fascists in office.
It is, for them.
Especially having Trump be "the bottom".
Ever watch Shameless, the US version? Its along the same lines as Terry, Mickey's dad. He only hated Mickey because he was catching, because "It aint gay if you're doing the fucking, just if you get fucked".
So, in this case, yes, making implications of gay sex happening, with Trump catching, is VERY effective at it.
It is, for them.
Fucking delusional you think this is making them sweat at all
-
You needlessly choose to take offence. It shows who is sub and who dom. It doesn't matter, except to you it seems, what sex they have
You needlessly choose to take offence
KKK
