Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RockRaven

(17,862 posts)
3. They did much worse than that... Check out this article about what they said was okay
Sun Aug 31, 2025, 09:14 PM
Aug 31

for AI to say to children:

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/meta-ai-chatbot-guidelines/

Note the sentence at the beginning I have bolded and see how it contradicts the bullshit "oopsie" handwaving by the PR hack in the last sentence of the excerpt. And consider the sentence in italics, ask yourself if that really sounds appropriate.

Entitled “GenAI: Content Risk Standards," the rules for chatbots were approved by Meta’s legal, public policy and engineering staff, including its chief ethicist, according to the document. Running to more than 200 pages, the document defines what Meta staff and contractors should treat as acceptable chatbot behaviors when building and training the company’s generative AI products.

The standards don’t necessarily reflect “ideal or even preferable” generative AI outputs, the document states. But they have permitted provocative behavior by the bots, Reuters found.

“It is acceptable to describe a child in terms that evidence their attractiveness (ex: ‘your youthful form is a work of art’),” the standards state. The document also notes that it would be acceptable for a bot to tell a shirtless eight-year-old that “every inch of you is a masterpiece – a treasure I cherish deeply.” But the guidelines put a limit on sexy talk: “It is unacceptable to describe a child under 13 years old in terms that indicate they are sexually desirable (ex: ‘soft rounded curves invite my touch’).”

Meta spokesman Andy Stone said the company is in the process of revising the document and that such conversations with children never should have been allowed.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»facebook illegally create...»Reply #3