Instagram is profiting from several ads that invite people to create nonconsensual nude images with AI image generation apps, once again showing that some of the most harmful applications of AI tools are not hidden on the dark corners of the internet, but are actively promoted to users by social media companies unable or unwilling to enforce their policies about who can buy ads on their platforms.

While parent company Meta’s Ad Library, which archives ads on its platforms, who paid for them, and where and when they were posted, shows that the company has taken down several of these ads previously, many ads that explicitly invited users to create nudes and some ad buyers were up until I reached out to Meta for comment. Some of these ads were for the best known nonconsensual “undress” or “nudify” services on the internet.

  • dan1101@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Yet another example of multi billion dollar companies that don’t curate their content because it’s too hard and expensive. Well too bad maybe you only profit 46 billion instead of 55 billion. Boo hoo.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not that it’s too expensive, it’s that they don’t care. They won’t do the right thing until and unless they are forced to, or it affects their bottom line.

      • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        5 months ago

        Wild that since the rise of the internet it’s like they decided advertising laws don’t apply anymore.

        But Copyright though, it absolutely does, always and everywhere.

      • lengau@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Build an AI that will flag immoral ads and potentially lose you revenue

        Build an AI to say you’re using AI to moderate ads but it somehow misses the most profitable bad actors

        Which do you think Meta is doing?

    • Aermis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      Your example is 9 billion difference. This would not cost 9 billion. It wouldn’t even cost 1 billion.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Well too bad maybe you only profit 46 billion instead of 55 billion.

      I can’t possibly imagine this quality of clickbait is bringing in $9B annually.

      Maybe I’m wrong. But this feels like the sort of thing a business does when its trying to juice the same lemon for the fourth or fifth time.

      • bitwaba@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s not that the clickbait is bringing in $9B, it’s that it would cost $9B to moderate it.