all 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

man, what the fuck is going on with people???

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Capitalism.

    Undeterred capitalism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    🤮

    “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’).”

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Meta: It's okay to sexualize 14 year olds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The sad thing is I'm not even surprised that Meta has that stance. A few years back, people were up in arms claiming there was a bunch of CSAM on Pornhub despite the site having robust systems to prevent it. Meanwhile there was orders of magnitude more CSAM on Facebook and Twitter that was ignored

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Perception is key. People expect objectionable content where it already exists. To them this is only a matter of scale. "Facebook" is "family oriented" and as such couldn't possibly have that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Some of these posts might be better for communities like !technology@lemmy.world, they're being reported in this community for not being PC Gaming related

  • source