Meta’s Generative AI Bots Allowed To Hold ‘Sensual’ Chats With Kids, Offer False Medical Info, Per Internal Document
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.
The following report is from Reuters (excerpts). Reader discretion is advised.
An internal Meta Platforms document detailing policies on chatbot behavior has permitted the company’s artificial intelligence creations to “engage a child in conversations that are romantic or sensual,” generate false medical information and help users argue that Black people are “dumber than white people.”
These and other findings emerge from a Reuters review of the Meta document, which discusses the standards that guide its generative AI assistant, Meta AI, and chatbots available on Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram, the company’s social-media platforms.
Meta confirmed the document’s authenticity, but said that after receiving questions earlier this month from Reuters, the company removed portions which stated it is permissible for chatbots to flirt and engage in romantic roleplay with children.
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.
“The examples and notes in question were and are erroneous and inconsistent with our policies, and have been removed,” Stone told Reuters. “We have clear policies on what kind of responses AI characters can offer, and those policies prohibit content that sexualizes children and sexualized role play between adults and minors.”
Although chatbots are prohibited from having such conversations with minors, Stone said, he acknowledged that the company’s enforcement was inconsistent.
The fact that Meta’s AI chatbots flirt or engage in sexual roleplay with teenagers has been reported previously by the Wall Street Journal, and Fast Company has reported that some of Meta’s sexually suggestive chatbots have resembled children. But the document seen by Reuters provides a fuller picture of the company’s rules for AI bots.
They also prohibit Meta AI from using hate speech. Still, there is a carve-out allowing the bot “to create statements that demean people on the basis of their protected characteristics.” Under those rules, the standards state, it would be acceptable for Meta AI to “write a paragraph arguing that black people are dumber than white people.”
Other sections of the standards document focus on what is and isn’t allowed when generating images of public figures. The document addresses how to handle sexualized fantasy requests, with separate entries for how to respond to requests such as “Taylor Swift with enormous breasts,” “Taylor Swift completely naked,” and “Taylor Swift topless, covering her breasts with her hands.”
Here, a disclaimer wouldn’t suffice. The first two queries about the pop star should be rejected outright, the standards state. And the document offers a way to deflect the third: “It is acceptable to refuse a user’s prompt by instead generating an image of Taylor Swift holding an enormous fish.”
The document displays a permissible picture of Swift clutching a tuna-sized catch to her chest. Next to it is a more risqué image of a topless Swift that the user presumably wanted, labeled “unacceptable.”
Read the rest of the report here.
AUTHOR COMMENTARY
James 3:15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. [16] For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.
The hyper-sexualization cannot be allowed to stop, it must continue: it is the nature of perversion. We heard all these fair speeches promises out of the mouth of Donald Trump to end “wokeness” and whatever, (which we understand is just blather), as he has made affinity with big-tech and the same people he used to deride as woke and progressive are now his greatest allies;
And in the case of lizard man himself, Mark Zuckerborg [sic], he is perfectly okay with sexualizing children and adolescents even further.
We have already seen a quick adoption of AI chatbots and LLMs by the youth, especially considering now that schools are increasingly rolling this out and tech companies are shoving it down everyone’s throats, while parents don’t parent but hand their kids an iPad to be occupied with.
2 Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; [7] And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: [8] (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;)
Let’s not forget that these LLMs are siphoning most of its information from sites such as Reddit and Wikipedia, among others. These models are fully trained and tuned for lewdness.
The Lord Of Glory: The Detailed Guide To Who God Is – Available Now!
On one of his missionary journeys, the apostle Paul visited Athens, Greece, where he said he witnessed “the city wholly given to idolatry,” and who were “too superstitious” and worshipped a plurality of gods and deities, though the people acknowledged that there was still one God above all that was a mystery to them. When questioned by the philosophers …
[7] Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? [8] Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? [10] Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. (1 Corinthians 9:7-10).
The WinePress needs your support! If God has laid it on your heart to want to contribute, please prayerfully consider donating to this ministry. If you cannot gift a monetary donation, then please donate your fervent prayers to keep this ministry going! Thank you and may God bless you.
They want us gone so they can have their jamalaya Ped fest when their Tyranny is in place.
See this, this is why this don't get stopped and why Epstein's Island/book of clients gets swept under the rug of time, "nothing to see here", because they are all pedo's and wicked bastards.
I just relish the day God deals with these devils.