- cross-posted to:
- fuck_ai
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- fuck_ai
- [email protected]
Sounds like meta’s judge will have to invent a grand unified theory of fair use to excuse this.
I kept saying about various lawsuits that the important thing is discovery. Nobody knew all the idiotic shit these folks were doing, so nobody could sue them properly.
The “to minors” is a bit inflammatory. “Without any sense of discretion or propriety” is more accurate. It’s not like you seed torrents for specific people. P2P just doesn’t care if anyone is a minor or not, and downloading anything makes it available tl everyone anonymously. If you ever downloaded an R rated movie, you probably shared it with minors. The way it’s written makes it sound intentional and predatory.
Yea, it’s not good of Ars to report the shameless “think of the kids” spin uncritically.
Exactly, plus there’s no shortage of bad shit Meta has done to the youth, this is a stupid reach.
I’m just going to come out and say it: I don’t give a Kentucky fried fuck about the kids.
This is all they wrote about it in the body of the article.
What did you want them to say?
“But of course, it’s not the responsibility of the one hosting adult content to make reasonable attempts to prevent minors from downloading the content they distribute. Contrary to the laws we just cited. As we all know, it’s only the original torrent author who should take any heat. You might be surprised to learn this goes for CSAM too.”
Or maybe,
“But of course, there’s no way a minor could figure out how to use something as complicated as a torrent”
They just mentioned what was alleged.
I made some over the top examples for fun. What did you expect them to counter the allegations with?
If a minor knows how to use bittorrent in 2025, I’m more than happy to upload R-rated movies to them. It’s not like it’s the biggest hurdle to overcome, but it’s big enough that I trust the judgment of that young person.
I don’t think it’s even illegal to watch R-rated movies as a minor, it’s more of a guideline for your caretakers.
I used that example because I didn’t want to use the same inflammatory rhetorical concept as the article. Some countries might have regulations related to “corruption” of minors for sharing anything inappropriate with them.
@themeatbridge
P2P may not care but a mega-corporation ought to care about who they might be making the files available to. Using a P2P tool doesn’t make it any better than putting it on an open FTP server at Facebook.com.
P2P isn’t the target here so your knee-jerk defensive posture is misplaced.
P2P vs FTP or whatever is not the point. Subtitling the article “Lawsuit: Meta may have seeded porn to minors while hiding piracy for AI training.” (emphasis mine) is misleading as it implies they were seeding the files with the intention or purpose to make them available to children.
Also, I find it disingenuous to pretend like seeding a torrent originally published by someone else is the same thing as publishing the file on an FTP site yourself, even if there’s legal precedent for treating it that way. Even if the bytes of the file are flowing out from your computer, that doesn’t mean you’re the one who made the file available, “to minors” or otherwise.
If I say “bitofhope may have stepped on a bug while walking here.” I’m not accusing you of anything. I’m just stating a fact.
Yes, the emphasis is yours. Not the articles.
Also, you totally used the absurd argument I made in my other comment. 🤣 (afaik the original seeder can drop off a torrent without breaking it.)
I agree with you, and fuck Facebook for a variety of reasons. I’m not defending Meta in the slightest. Nor is the allegation even false. Meta employees seeded porn to improve their torrent ratios and increase the speed with which they downloaded unlicensed copyrighted content to train their AI models. That porn was available to anyone with access to the seed, including likely minors.
My point is that the pearl-clutching Helen Lovejoy act is a bit much. The last time I downloaded p2p porn was probably on Bearshare and it included a bonzi buddy, and I was a minor at the time, but I’m not going to pretend that it’s some line in the sand. I’m not going to apply a different moral standard to Facebook than I apply to myself or anyone else.
Focus on what they did, which is bad enough, and don’t frame it in a way that provides the “but everybody does it” defense.
I mean, arguably an open FTP server would have been better because how many kids these days could actually use an FTP client?
About as many as a bittorrent client, i.e. a rounding error.
Agreed. And as I mentioned in my other comment, they didn’t belabor the allegation. It was referenced with one sentence in the article.