this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
902 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

63375 readers
4589 users here now

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


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Update: After this article was published, Bluesky restored Kabas' post and told 404 Media the following: "This was a case of our moderators applying the policy for non-consensual AI content strictly. After re-evaluating the newsworthy context, the moderation team is reinstating those posts."

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 day ago

Here's my take on it:

  • I don't care about AI being used on public figures, if you won't want people to use you, don't be in public, or ruin the government. No one has made AI featuring me.
  • This is no different than a political cartoon, the only difference is no one made it directly by hand.
  • Bluesky doesn't have to host it, but I also would want it applied equally. If this was perma-removed, all AI or all political shit would be. I don't like it, but selective moderating is what got us Trump in the first place with Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit.
  • I don't like queerphobic shit being used to call out Trump and Musk. Use their actual actions and words, not "haha they gay". It's just wild how certain kinds of informal bigtry are okay when you use them on people who are evil. Like the people who constantly insult Trump's weight because he's evil. Maybe he's just evil and happens to be fat.
  • And let's not pretend Jack Dorsey is somehow a saint when he only removed Trump from twitter after Jan 6. Nothing before despite how horrid Trump was. I credit Jack Dorsey to enabling Trump, and it's why I refuse to join "Twitter 2 made by the guy who enabled Twitter to be the shit place it was".
[–] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (4 children)

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?

[–] WorkshopBubby@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

exactly, we should drop this approach of taking the high road, until they are gone

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lenz@lemmy.ml 37 points 1 day ago (18 children)

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.

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago

In my opinion, public figures, including celebrities, give a degree of consent implicitly by seeking to be public figures. I dont think that for celebrities that should extend to lewd or objectionable material, but if your behavior has been to seek being a public figure you can't be upset when people use your likeness in various ways.

For politicians, I would default to "literally everything is protected free speech", with exceptions relating to things that are definitively false, damaging and unrelated to their public work.
"I have a picture of Elon musk engaging in pedophillia" is all those, and would be justifiably removed. Anything short of that though should be permitted.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Where do you draw the line for the rich fucks of the world? Realistic CGI? Realistic drawings? Edited photos?

[–] BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 5 points 1 day ago

I think the important point in this case is not that the content is acceptable, but that it is newsworthy.

If somebody made the video and posted it, I could see it being permanently taken down. And it was at first, per the letter of their policy.

But the fact that government employees had it playing on government property inside government facilities, to protest some extreme and historical stuff going on, means it should be recorded for the public and for history.

I look at it much the same way as the photos of upside down American flags that various government employees put up. Just posting an upside down flag and saying how America is wrong is an opinion like any other that would get lost in the noise. But when it’s people inside the government intending it as a sign of distress, very much more newsworthy and important to record.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

porn

Oh, saving the children are you.

Its a picture of trump sucking elons toes. Conflating that with the idea of "porn" is a bit of an overreach in light of how rare toe fetish people are. I imagine you can find a tiny popyulation of people who consider anything erotic. Wearing cotton. Having a roastbeef sandwhich in your hand. Styling hair a certain way. Being an asian female.

Want to ban all of that too?

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

This is no different than a really well drawn political cartoon.

Politicians shouldn't have the power to control the kinds of things you say about politicians.

[–] mavu@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world 282 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (26 children)

I guess I get it. They would not like to set precedent to allow non-consensual AI generated porn on the platform. Seems reasonable. That said, fuck Donny. The video is hilarious. It’s fine if Bluesky doesn’t host it though.

[–] GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Holy shit. A reasonable take from someone who clearly leaves the house.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 36 points 2 days ago (6 children)

Well, looks like they put it back up. I think I agree with you though. It might be better for them to restrict this. Frankly republican incels excel at generating this kind of content and this sets the precedent that Bluesky will welcome such AI garbage. I'm not arguing that this stuff shouldn't be made in good spirit, but for a serious platform to not moderate it out I think invites chaos.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
[–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago (12 children)

please stop being weird and gross

also please no more 'look bad person do gay' content

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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!"

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 5 points 1 day ago (3 children)

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.

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 4 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

It is, for them.

Fucking crazy you think this is making them sweat at all

all you're doing is giving them completely valid ammo that liberal 'virtue signaling' is completely hollow because look at your hypocritical behavior

not to mention telling all the queers you snarl at every 2-4 years to vote for you exactly how you feel about them

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today -2 points 13 hours ago

Queer and trans friends of mine were also laughing their asses off at this video....

And yes, calling out Trump as being the "beta cuck" to Elon DOES cause discomfort for a narcissist like Melania's husband.

And it's the sort of thing to push, to cause fractures in the white house.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] WorkshopBubby@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

it's #darkwoke, the only people who are offended by this are the Nazi's, and that is exactly who we should be offending

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Doorbook@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Amazed people saying it is correct decision! This is two public figures and doing art or any form of expression material with their image should be protected under freedom of speech.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] disconnectikacio@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Bluesky will become just the same az elonx...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (13 children)

Ah, the rewards of moderation: the best move is not to play. Fuck it is & has always been a better answer. Anarchy of the early internet was better than letting some paternalistic authority decide the right images & words to allow us to see, and decentralization isn't a bad idea.

Yet the forward-thinking people of today know better and insist that with their brave, new moderation they'll paternalize better without stopping to acknowledge how horribly broken, arbitrary, & fallible that entire approach is. Instead of learning what we already knew, social media keeps repeating the same dumb mistakes, and people clamor to the newest iteration of it.

[–] noli@lemm.ee 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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 DMCA).

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] noli@lemm.ee 2 points 21 hours ago

I feel like it’s a balancing act and you can’t make everyone happy. I, personally, don’t hang around unmoderated communities because they are often worse: hostile, full of spam and questionable content… so basically /b/. But even 4chan is moderated to an extent shrug

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I had to hack an ex’s account once to get the revenge porn they posted of me taken down.

There’s a balance at the end of the day.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 day ago (10 children)

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.

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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.

[–] tron@midwest.social 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] b3an@lemmy.world 39 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Put it on Facebook! Ol’ 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 🤣

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 55 points 2 days ago (2 children)

fwiw they restored the post and blamed it on a moderator being too strict in applying a policy regarding non consensual ai porn. It’s objectively good they have policies banning such things but it was completely obvious from context that this was not meant to be pornographic at all

As such, one could easily read it with cynicism as responding to backlash as they only reviewed said moderators actions after this article came out and the associated clamor

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›