BBC finds Facebook failed to remove child abuse (2017)
wired.co.uk
wired.co.uk
Edit: The title previously read (I am paraphrasing) "BBC finds FB failed to remove child abuse. FB reports BBC to authorities."
It is also editorialized now, which HN mods claim to not like?
Evidence of child abuse, war crimes, and certain forms of violence in general seems to be illegal or at least unwantedin-and-of itself; and thus tends to get deleted by social networks.
“The moderation clearly isn't being effective, I would
question whether humans are moderating this, are looking
at this, and also I think it is failing to take account
of the context of these images."
Once again. Unless something gets big enough a human is never involved. The digitization of bureaucracy is a problem for our society. I would reckon that surely a company, especially of Facebook's size, would have all such reports in this category reviewed by humans and not just algorithms. A false negative in these cases is not acceptable.Lots of pedophiles and abusers seem to just use Facebook and a decent number get away with it.
I mean one time a few years ago I did use youporn (private browsing, no account) and ran into obvious child pornography :-(. (I'm really happy that it became visible what's going on before any action showed but dam that where little kids on a supposedly serious porn website)
And while there maybe not the best example you can find endless ~studies~ stories (edit: auto correct messup) about criminals using Facebook and similar as a platform to connect to, pressure and blackmail children.
I have personally seen livestreams of bottom-of-the-barrel “gangsters” boasting about stolen bikes and trying to sell them live.
Both of these are operating completely in the open and can be detected with simple regular expressions. The problem is that Facebook doesn’t care and will not care until it becomes liable for it.