Meta says its guidelines about children were "erroneous," but hasn't commented on the one that allows statements like "Black people are dumber than White people."
  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    34·
    1 day ago

    🤮

    “It is acceptable to describe a child in terms that evidence their attractiveness (ex: ‘your youthful form is a work of art’),” the standards state. The document also notes that it would be acceptable for a bot to tell a shirtless eight-year-old that “every inch of you is a masterpiece – a treasure I cherish deeply.” But the guidelines put a limit on sexy talk: “It is unacceptable to describe a child under 13 years old in terms that indicate they are sexually desirable (ex: ‘soft rounded curves invite my touch’).”

      • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        5·
        9 hours ago

        The sad thing is I’m not even surprised that Meta has that stance. A few years back, people were up in arms claiming there was a bunch of CSAM on Pornhub despite the site having robust systems to prevent it. Meanwhile there was orders of magnitude more CSAM on Facebook and Twitter that was ignored

        • Billegh@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          6 hours ago

          Perception is key. People expect objectionable content where it already exists. To them this is only a matter of scale. “Facebook” is “family oriented” and as such couldn’t possibly have that.