A Pornhub Chatbot Stopped Millions From Searching for Child Abuse Videos
www.wired.com
Every time someone in the UK searched for child abuse material on Pornhub, a chatbot appeared and told them how to get help.

A trial program conducted by Pornhub in collaboration with UK-based child protection organizations aimed to deter users from searching for child abuse material (CSAM) on its website. Whenever CSAM-related terms were searched, a warning message and a chatbot appeared, directing users to support services. The trial reported a significant reduction in CSAM searches and an increase in users seeking help. Despite some limitations in data and complexity, the chatbot showed promise in deterring illegal behavior online. While the trial has ended, the chatbot and warnings remain active on Pornhub’s UK site, with hopes for similar measures across other platforms to create a safer internet environment.

  • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
    1·
    9 months ago

    If heterosexual people could learn to enjoy homosexual stuff why shouldn’t homosexual people be able to learn to enjoy heterosexual stuff? In your words: they only have to put their mind to it.

    That’s not what I meant by “reverse”, I meant in in the learn to enjoy vs. learn to not enjoy sense.

    androgen hormone levels of the mother during pregnancy.

    That sets a baseline instinct, it’s not the end-all be-all of sexual attraction. It sets an attraction, not a repulsion, and just as you don’t need to be genetically attracted to carpentry, as long as you’re not repulsed by it to a degree that can’t be humanely overcome you can learn to enjoy it.

    See, I’d say that’s the wrong question. At least to begin with. Is change possible? If the answer is no, there’s no point in asking why you would want that change.

    But the answer to whether it’s possible or not is not dependent on whether we want to use that possibility, or whether evangelicals could use it as an excuse to torture people.

    I fear you’ve lost me again. I really don’t know what you’re trying to convey here.

    Basically that it’s not society’s business who you choose (or not) to be attracted to, as long as it’s all consensual. If you have a Yogi and they want to be aroused by eating spaghetti then that’s their business.

    The end result could be very distinct but the way to it is not a conscious process. You can consciously choose to try something new, but you can’t choose whether you like it or not.

    Choosing whether we should like things or not is our largest degree of freedom. The ancient Stoics knew it, and modern psychology picked up on it (CBT is directly influenced by Epictetus). The capacity to do that is, for most people, buried under layers and layers of conditioning because learned helplessness is great if you want to rule people but that doesn’t mean that it’s not there.

    And, of course, don’t get me wrong, the capacity is not limitless, things like gender dysphoria are on a deeper level than the mechanisms of pursuit and avoidance. But if you agree that it’s possible to learn to enjoy cleaning the bathroom for someone who really dreaded it before: What makes sucking dick so different that it becomes an impossibility?

    Long arc back to the beginning: I doubt the measures described in the article have any meaningful impact.

    Even if the impact is small, even if it’s basically zero, it’s still worth doing because there’s no harm in it.