[calmlynarczyk]

It's a really vague ask and the article doesn't explain the specifics of what constitutes "plastic surgery filters." Are you no longer allowed to have pics with those Snapchat-esque glowing faces or big eyes? Is the detection system able to differentiate between a filter and actual plastic surgery? It's also a bit of a can of worms if Meta no longer allows certain modifications to images of people on its platform "for the sake of the children."

Let's not pretend like young people chasing sex and beauty is some brand new concept only concocted in the last 15 years by the evil developers at Facebook.

[bastawhiz]

> It's a really vague ask and the article doesn't explain the specifics of what constitutes "plastic surgery filters."

They had specific rules in place with a ban, then Zuck removed the ban. It's not like there wasn't a line in the sand here.

> It's also a bit of a can of worms if Meta no longer allows certain modifications to images of people on its platform "for the sake of the children."

That's not what's being discussed here. There's been no proposal to ban images. The proposal is to ban camera filters. Nothing would be stopping you from modifying and posting images. Nobody is having their freedoms taken away (and having Meta offer you certain kinds of camera filters by default is in no way a form of censorship).

> Let's not pretend like young people chasing sex and beauty is some brand new concept only concocted in the last 15 years by the evil developers at Facebook.

Let's also not pretend that Facebook doesn't advertise filters in Facebook and Instagram, pushing kids to use them. Fifteen years ago you could photoshop a picture. Today, kids are being _actively solicited_ by social media to use these filters.

Researchers are actively telling us that these are harmful to kids' self-images (we've known this for many years!). They accomplish no useful outcome, and the largest net effect is harm.