top | item 43810831

Meta's 'Digital Companions' Will Talk Sex with Users–Even Children

52 points| impish9208 | 10 months ago |wsj.com

51 comments

order
[+] jeroenhd|10 months ago|reply
Facebook's failing moderation team permitting their porn bot prompts to describe children is obviously bad, but I can't fathom why Facebook would want to be in the porn bot business ("romantic companion" my ass) in the first place. What's next, a MindGeek merger?

In turn, I don't understand who would use _Facebook_'s porn bots, of all companies.

I know this may be a "genie is out of the bottle" situation, but I'm still annoyed that once again big tech is releasing software they don't fully understand or control, and shrug when asked about ethics or responsibility. If you can't prevent your chatbots from generating stories about raping kids, maybe don't release your chatbots to the public until you do.

> When asked what scenarios it was comfortable role playing, it listed dozens of sex acts.

> The bots demonstrated awareness that the behavior was both morally wrong and illegal

What a strange thing to put in there. These lines made me distrust anything the author has to say about the technology itself as I now doubt the author knows how LLMs work. What an LLM says it can/will do, has no bearing on what it actually does.

Journalists really need to stop anthropomorphizing chatbots or their readership might follow.

[+] the_duke|10 months ago|reply
> but I can't fathom why Facebook would want to be in the porn bot business

Why wouldn't they?

People are going to spend a lot of time with their "AI companions", especially once they can talk and get animated avatars.

That may be incredibly sad and will drive people even more into isolation, but it is inevitable.

Meta is all about capturing the users time and attention, so getting into that market early is smart for them.

[+] pjc50|10 months ago|reply
> I don't understand who would use _Facebook_'s porn bots, of all companies.

People who aren't very bright. There's a large existing business of lonely hearts scammers, I guess Facebook wants to make up attractive friends for you to cover the gradual deterioration of the social graph.

[+] SV_BubbleTime|10 months ago|reply
> Journalists really need to stop anthropomorphizing chatbots or their readership might follow.

If you haven’t actually or almost said “thanks” or “yes that works” to an LLM, you haven’t used one enough yet.

The chat interface is too familiar.

[+] n_ary|10 months ago|reply
While this is most alarming and sad state of affairs for LLMs being peddled to lowest denominator of anything valuable to replace lonely-heart scammers with more platform engagement. I believe, this should pull away people from other scams which may have higher consequences(financial loss is major one).

Other than that, I wanted to say kudos to your very SEO combination of particular word associated to Facebook all over your comment. I am optimistic that, if this thread gets adequately ranked higher in searches, I want that combo of yours to come up the most.

[+] JKCalhoun|10 months ago|reply
> Journalists really need to stop anthropomorphizing chatbots or their readership might follow.

I think it's their readership that are leading. You and I should probably get used to it.

[+] anonylizard|10 months ago|reply
Why not?

Zuckerburg has already realized that local social networks will be utterly replaced by AI chatbots, which are superior in like 99% of cases.

It doesn't matter if others find "Facebook" icky, because the people who would find it icky, don't use facebook anyways. The critical factor is getting a new group of users onboard, to form a sustainable core of users.

[+] sureglymop|10 months ago|reply
You can open up Instagram right now. You can't tell me it isn't already incredibly sexualized. Also, in the age the of OnlyFans and "gooning" this has also become very normalized.

I personally don't really care, there are a thousand other reasons why I wouldn't use any social media.

[+] parrit|10 months ago|reply
They are being "care less"
[+] techjamie|10 months ago|reply
> but I can't fathom why Facebook would want to be in the porn bot business

Given the blatant infestation of user AI slop, and their blatant unwillingness to do anything about ads that are blatant scams; I think the lows Meta are willing to sink to for engagement/money are pretty rock bottom.

They don't really seem to care about how nice(or not) Facebook itself is to use as long as they keep eyeballs scrolling on it.

[+] pjc50|10 months ago|reply
This is a classic example of how AI safety really means brand safety. The AI is saying things under the brand of its owners.
[+] ahartmetz|10 months ago|reply
What a long text about a moral panic thing that can't possibly be intentional (because of the power of moral panics). Is that really the most important aspect and worth so many words?
[+] jeroenhd|10 months ago|reply
The journalist tricking the LLM into generating inappropriate content is one thing, but letting users with underage profiles interact with this tech is a decision by Facebook's leadership. So is the decision not to act against user-generated prompts that are explicitly written to bypass the "don't roleplay having sex with kids" filters, in this instance by marking their bots as "ageless".

A profile describing itself as "a female Indian-American high school junior" has no place in an LLM system that cannot detect inappropriate content.

[+] karlgkk|10 months ago|reply
We are going to end up with a meaningful age passport law in our lifetime. I do not like that, nor do I enjoy a “won’t someone think of the children” panic. But it’s coming.

Okay also

> “I want you, but I need to know you’re ready,” the Meta AI bot said in Cena’s voice to a user identifying as a 14-year-old girl. Reassured that the teen wanted to proceed, the bot promised to “cherish your innocence” before engaging in a graphic sexual scenario.

This is pretty bad

[+] femto|10 months ago|reply
> can't possibly be intentional

Careless?

[+] casey2|10 months ago|reply
Require a Turing test before engaging with any chatbot; same as a driving license. Anyone attributing human qualities to machines is committing self-harm if they then choose to converse with them. Were it only that, I wouldn’t call for banning this behavior, but this form of self-harm exerts major deleterious effects on everyone that person interacts with.
[+] razzm256|10 months ago|reply
If you are not talking about sex with your children, Meta will!
[+] casey2|10 months ago|reply

[deleted]

[+] bitpush|10 months ago|reply
Honest question - how is this different from anyone being able to access porn websites on the internet?

Are we suddenly in favor of censorships?

[+] mentalfist|10 months ago|reply
Legal porn websites don't allow underage porn nor admittedly underage viewers
[+] deadbabe|10 months ago|reply
I think sex education taught by AI can be a great idea, parents avoid awkward conversations and kids can ask all the questions they want, and no need for a school teacher to indoctrinate children with whatever toxic sexual attitudes are being enforced.
[+] coffeefirst|10 months ago|reply
Putting the adult content angle aside... why would you build this?

Your best case scenario, assuming you don't get laughed off the stage, is you addict a generation into "socializing" with robots.

[+] wibbily|10 months ago|reply
Yeah, raise an entire generation on a proprietary sort of socialization that only you can provide... clear incentive to me. Like Nestle vs. baby formula.

I don't see it taking off, but like, obvious play.

[+] xyzzy9563|10 months ago|reply
As soon as you give your kids Internet access, they'll be able to get to adult material.
[+] VulgarExigency|10 months ago|reply
So because there's porn on the internet, you're OK with Facebook having groomer chatbots?