Not the best news in this report. We need to find ways to do more.

  • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    We do know they only found, what, 112 actual images of CP? That’s a very small number. I’d say that paints us in a pretty good light, relatively.

    • dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      112 images out of 325,000 images scanned over two days, is about 0,03% So we are doing pretty well. With more moderation tools we could continue to knock out those sigmas.

    • blazera@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      it says 112 instances of known CSAM. But that’s based on their methodology, right, and their methodology is not actually looking at the content, it’s looking at hashtags and whether google safesearch thinks it’s explicit. Which Im pretty sure doesnt differentiate with what the subject of the explicitness is. It’s just gonna try to detect breast or genitals I imagine.

      Though they do give a few damning examples of things like actual CP trading, but also that they’ve been removed.