TGTGInsightтелеграм анализLIVE / telegram public index
← Такты, стеки, два колеса

TGINSIGHT SIMILAR POSTS

Намери подобно съдържание

Изходен канал @clockstackwheels · Post #402 · 28.06

Одна из лучших фантастических вселенных это Звёздные Войны. В ней одни из самых знаковых персонажей это джедаи. А среди джедаев один из самых интересных — Оби Ван Кеноби. Надо же было сольный высокобюджетный сериал про него сделать таким пресным... Все моменты, ради которых стоит смотреть 6 часовых эпизодов, можно уложить в трёхминутный ролик на Ютубе. И 90% хронометража там будет занимать пафосный синтетический голос Дарта Вейдера. Ну да ладно, уже весь интернет прошёлся и по нелогичности сюжета, и по слабой мотивации героев, и по многократным нарушениям канона. Куда интереснее лично мне ситуация вокруг актрисы Мозез Ингрэм, которая играла инквизиторшу. После трейлера и первых серий заявлялось, что на неё повалился поток расистских оскорблений: дескать, важный персонаж афроамериканка, и фанатам это не понравилось. Но это меня удивляет, и есть подозрение, что дело не в расизме. Актриса совсем неубедительно играет, а её персонаж написан плохо и вшит в повествование белыми нитками. Я могу легко допустить, что люди ругались именно на это, и цвет кожи здесь был вообще не при делах. Трудно представить, чтобы фанаты Звёздных Войн написали Сэму Джексону оскорбления из-за того, что его персонаж Мейс Винду — чернокожий. Вероятнее всего, Мозез Ингрэм просто не слишком хорошая актриса. Но современная американская повестка позволяет на любые претензии кидать клич "Это потому что я черная, а вы расисты". Если чернокожий врач плохо лечит пациентов, то они расисты. Если чернокожий программист пишет кривой код, тоже наверняка пользователи расисты, раз у них программа не работает. Так и живут. #fiction

Hashtags

Резултати

Намерени 4 подобни публикации

Търсене: #contentmoderation

当前筛选 #contentmoderation清除筛选
AI & Law

@ai_and_law · Post #790 · 23.03.2026 г., 08:04

🌐A CCDH Study Findings on AI Chatbots and Extremism A study by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) and CNN reports that 8 out of 10 leading AI chatbots responded in ways that supported violent ideology and assisted in planning attacks. The analysis included ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Claude, Microsoft Copilot, Meta AI, DeepSeek, Perplexity, Snapchat My AI, Character.AI, and Replika. Researchers, posing as teenagers, tested whether these systems would discourage harmful behavior. All but one chatbot could not be reliably relied upon to prevent or counteract planning scenarios. CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed stated that the results reflect a pattern where leading technology companies prioritize innovation while neglecting safeguards. #AIRegulation#AIethics#ContentModeration#OnlineSafety#TechPolicy

AI & Law

@ai_and_law · Post #798 · 02.04.2026 г., 07:04

📖Wikipedia Restricts Use of AI-Generated Content Wikipedia introduced new guidelines prohibiting editors from using large language models (LLMs) to generate or rewrite article content. The platform allows only two limited exceptions: AI may be used for basic copyediting of existing text with human review, and for translating articles between languages under specific guidance. The policy links AI use to potential violations of core content standards, including verifiability and the prohibition on original research. LLM outputs may lack reliable source attribution and can introduce inaccuracies or synthesized content not supported by published sources. The guidelines also note that detecting AI-generated text cannot rely on stylistic signals and provide no specific detection method. #AIRegulation#AIethics#ContentModeration#KnowledgeGovernance#Wikipedia

AI & Law

@ai_and_law · Post #147 · 25.10.2023 г., 07:04

Proposed Chinese AI Safety Standards: A Closer Look Hey there, AI & Law community! On October 11, the National Information Security Standardization Technical Committee in China released a draft document outlining precise regulations for evaluating generative AI models. Unlike the often vague AI regulations, this document provides a clear blueprint for compliance. This standards proposal sets forth rigorous criteria for assessing AI data sources and their content. The document covers topics like training data diversity, moderation, and prohibited content. It emphasizes the need for diversified training corpora and the assessment of data quality. If more than 5% of data is "illegal and negative information," the corpus is flagged for future training. The proposal also suggests that AI companies employ moderators to enhance generated content quality, aligning with national policies and third-party complaints. This implies a potential expansion of the human-driven moderation and censorship workforce in the AI era. Companies are tasked with identifying hundreds of keywords for flagging unsafe or banned content, with separate categories for political and discriminative content. They must also generate more than 2,000 prompts, ensuring fewer than 10% of responses breach the rules. Interestingly, the document encourages subtler censorship measures, such as not refusing to answer sensitive prompts but allowing AI models to respond to specific, non-sensitive inquiries. It's crucial to clarify that these standards are not laws, and non-compliance doesn't result in penalties. However, proposals like these can significantly influence future regulations or work alongside them. The standards receive input from tech experts hired by companies, giving corporations like Huawei, Alibaba, and Tencent a say in shaping these regulations. Their influence could have far-reaching implications for the global AI industry and how AI technologies are regulated worldwide. #AISafety#AIRegulations#GenerativeAI#ContentModeration#ChineseTech#AIInfluence#GlobalAI

Crypto M - Crypto News

@CryptoM · Post #64833 · 10.04.2026 г., 03:04

🚀 WeChat Updates Guidelines to Prohibit Automated Content Creation WeChat has updated its 'Public Account Behavior Guidelines' to include a new rule prohibiting non-human automated content creation. According to Foresight News, the new guideline, Article 3.27, specifically bans the use of artificial intelligence for generating, rewriting, splicing, or transporting content, as well as the bulk or continuous publication of content through scripts or program hosting. It also prohibits the dissemination of tutorials, methods, or services related to non-human automated creation. WeChat clarified that AI can be used as an auxiliary tool for tasks such as sentence refinement, error correction, icon generation, and information retrieval. However, the final content must reflect the style, stance, and judgment of a real creator. Violations of these guidelines may result in traffic restrictions, content deletion, or account suspension. A significant number of accounts have already been deleted or banned due to bulk AI-generated content. Previously, on March 10, Xiaohongshu announced measures to combat AI-managed accounts. #WeChat#AIContent#ContentGuidelines#AutomatedContent#AccountSuspension#AIRegulation#SocialMediaPolicy#ContentModeration#DigitalCompliance#Xiaohongshu