Comment by adontz | Hacker News Reader

Comment by adontz | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I am in no way defending PornHub, but how exactly should it be [self] moderated?

Can we use AI to detect underage and drunk people? PornHub already uses some computer vision technology to recognize kind of sex taking place and put time-codes on video. What are limitations of this technology? Can CV detect drunk person and not confuse facial expressions with an orgasm? We have seen epic failures of fully automated AI in our industry, like YouTube taking down videos with birds signing for DCMA copyright violations. Also, consent and legal age are defined very differently across the world and even within US. Which jurisdiction to refer to and why? Video can be legal for one web site visitor and illegal for another one at the same time. What to do in that case?

Can we have some kind of feedback form to report video as... what exactly? Private? Leaked? Amateur videos are very common. Independent models make a living from posting videos. Any feedback system will be abused by competing content providers, which are private persons mostly, not legal entities. So reporting party should take selfie for identification or what exactly?

What about all hard core BDSM content, when modeling non consensual sex is the very goal. Are we gonna ban BDSM? What about all fetishes, which may include underage sex fetish, rape play, etc. which when performed by adults is legal. Will computer vision recognize these exceptions? Will people do? Should we make people make final decisions? YouTube moderators deal with mental issues. Honestly, I have no idea what kind of terrible job should be moderating porn videos.

I understand that PornHub makes money, violates privacy and should be regulated, but without sane solution we'll just punish everyone without really solving the problem. New keywords will be coined to search for specific content, that's it. We already have lots of them, like MILF, ATM, DP. We'll get just DT for drunk teen, that's it. And when it'll get banned (for instance "rape" is a banned word on PornHub), another keyword will be coined.

Why should AI be employed? Why is fully-automated superhuman scale something companies should be allowed to achieve?

I mean, let's be real: How many new pornographic video uploads per day does PornHub actually need to serve it's audience? And the vast majority of content on PornHub likely falls into two categories: Major brand videos, in which they can work directly with the legal entities responsible for them, and user uploads of primarily copyright-infringing content. The former can be streamlined by connecting directly with brands, making sure they have all their legal ducks in order and that all of their performers are properly employed. For the latter, a slower, non-automated approval process is probably perfectly fine. Individual/amateur users who want to publish their own content could enter into a business relationship with the site, to achieve a pipeline closer to the first group, establishing a channel/brand that identifies the performers in the video and verifies their consent.

Fetish/BDSM content is arguably pretty important to the platform (and sex positivity in general), but again, my guess is a large portion comes from established adult film brands. If PornHub works directly with the actual people filming the video, verifies performer age eligibility and consent, and then approves the videos, there is no problem with the content of the video shown itself.

Unchecked open upload of whatever content a user has on their computer has no real need to exist here. At the very least, every video should be associated with the performers present in the video, and upon the revocation of consent from that performer, all of the videos containing them could be removed and prevented from being added again. This not only prevents abuse of non-consensual performers, but ensures the revenue generated from a video actually makes it back to consenting performers, as piracy is no longer possible using the platform.

>> How many new pornographic video uploads per day does PornHub actually need to serve it's audience?

As much as possible? It was 13 videos per minute in 2019. Each minute almost three hours of content are uploaded.

>> And the vast majority of content on PornHub likely falls into two categories: Major brand videos, in which they can work directly with the legal entities responsible for them

This assumption is very natural, but days of professional studios are gone. There are about 100 thousands amateur models registered on PornHub.

>> For the latter, a slower, non-automated approval process is probably perfectly fine.

Even if we'll estimate that just half of content is amateur, which is not so, PornHub would need at least 100 moderators working simultaneously at each moment of time to review every moment of all uploaded videos. I don't think anyone can view porn for 8 hours per day, so it's at least 4 shifts. Take into account vacations, and other things, that is easily 500-1000 of trained moderators who will know specific of genres, and will not punish fetish performers. And they'll need offices, computers, help of psychologists, security check because they can be source of major leak. I think we are talking about tens of millions dollars now.

>> my guess is a large portion comes from established adult film brands

There are big BDSM brands like Kink, but if you sum up minutes of content, it's mostly amateurs.

>> If PornHub works directly with the actual people filming the video, verifies performer age eligibility and consent, and then approves the videos, there is no problem with the content of the video shown itself.

So PornHub now has to perform full KYC, because US citizen would not know what Hungarian driver ID looks like. This is not a cheap service at all. And also PornHub now has verify that videos posted contain only verified identified models, which I have no idea how to perform. Also, now you enforce PornHub to keep a lot of Personally identifiable information about all performers which does not sound like a good idea in the first place.

>> Unchecked open upload of whatever content a user has on their computer has no real need to exist here. At the very least, every video should be associated with the performers present in the video, and upon the revocation of consent from that performer, all of the videos containing them could be removed and prevented from being added again.

You will just punish PornHub for being big, there is no way to enforce right to be forgotten across entire Internet.

> As much as possible?

Why? A given viewer is going to watch how many minutes of content a day? Even accepting for a wide spectrum of preferences, there's no reason PornHub needs three hours of new content a minute. Nobody's "already watched everything on PornHub", have they? If they can't manage it ethically, they shouldn't be allowed to.

> I think we are talking about tens of millions dollars now.

Good thing PornHub's reported 2015 revenue was nearly half a billion. They can afford to operate ethically.

> So PornHub now has to perform full KYC

Not really know-your-customer. In this case it's know-your-content-provider. I certainly don't suggest every viewer of porn needs to register. But every publisher of it, including amateur channels, should.

> This is not a cheap service at all.

Again, this company operates on a half billion dollar a year scale. They can afford to hire someone who can verify what a Hungarian driver's license looks like. They aren't poor.

>> As much as possible? >Why?

Because PornHub is a platform. Why not limit uploading videos on YouTube, just because they can't moderate them all?

> Good thing PornHub's reported 2015 revenue was nearly half a billion. They can afford to operate ethically. > They can afford to hire someone who can verify what a Hungarian driver's license looks like. They aren't poor.

First, define ethically in a worldwide accepted way.

Second, you are asking a business to take a loss just because you want them to. I don't think "ethically" is a strict legal term.

I believe there should be an unambiguous law taking into account interests of all parties. People get killed by cars, but cars are legal. We can't punish drivers only. And we can't punish content providers only.

> In this case it's know-your-content-provider.

I have posted on anonymity here. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22529650 It's simply dangerous.

> Because PornHub is a platform. Why not limit uploading videos on YouTube

Platforms aren't an inherent good. I absolutely think YouTube should be held accountable for it's behavior and the way it radicalizes people by recommending increasingly extreme videos. YouTube is a platform that is out of control, and another example of why unchecked immunity for platforms is a dystopian nightmare.

> define ethically in a worldwide accepted way

Not profiting from the distribution of child pornography. I think that's pretty universally understood to be required of ethical business. "Ethical" isn't a strict legal term, "distribution of child porn" is though.

>Why? A given viewer is going to watch how many minutes of content a day? Even accepting for a wide spectrum of preferences, there's no reason PornHub needs three hours of new content a minute.

I assume because not all pornographic content is equal and that much of it never gets seen or opened for a few seconds only to be abandoned.

With an adequate moderation strategy and proper vetting of channels, most low value content is going to evaporate. I'm not sure why a site getting two hours of new unwatched low quality video a minute is a selling point to anyone. It's probably not even that great of a business model.

This is mere conjecture but, wouldn't you spend more time on PornHub if there was so much crap to browse through to find the perfect video to get off to, as opposed to finding it right away and then leaving the website as soon as you finish?

True, though that's a very perverse incentive, as you're suggesting PornHub's best bet is to waste as much of their users' time as possible in getting to the right video, without frustrating them enough that they leave the site and go elsewhere. I suppose they'd get more search-page-result ad displays in, but arguably it makes them a worse porn site. The fact that they're the by-far most popular suggests that they don't provide a worse experience than other sites.

(I know PornHub releases a lot of statistics annually, I am sure average time for a user to... achieve their goal on the site for the day... is a figure they have released before.)

> I am in no way defending PornHub, but how exactly should it be [self] moderated?

Bad question. Moderation isn't a solution. It's in direct conflict with its bottom line.

As with anything that has serious consequences it should be regulated so that ethical considerations are followed. Porn produced should have a trail of paperwork tracking and identifying the production to individuals. Failure to have proper paperwork results people (content creator and/or distributors) being fined and going to jail. It's completely possible to produce amateur, fantasy, BSDM, MILF looking material with consenting individuals.

The problem is that sexual videos can be distributed easily and without regard (often without knowledge) of the people involved such that the work is spread long before the affected individuals can know what has been done to them. Simply put, unregulated material should be considered illegal.

Paperwork is not a solution at all. Porn performers must have right for anonymity because it's not safe to be porn actress/actor.

Old U.S. story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorelei_Lee_(actress)

Citing concerns of personal safety, Lee requested to testify under her stage name; the prosecution objected, arguing that allowing her to do so "gives some air of legitimacy to the porn star" (which Lee later called "incredibly insulting") and that "she shouldn't be treated any differently than anyone else in this case".[35] The case was ultimately dismissed on July 16, 2010,[36] before Lee was scheduled to testify.

New Russian story https://www.reddit.com/r/Lindemann/comments/f8ao8w/more_on_t... Families and friends recieve threats, members of the public get dragged in: After identifying the girls, families and friends of the girls also began to recieve threats. Home addresses of the girls were also posted online. Also, girls which had simply had selfies taken with Till Lindemann while he was travelling through the city of St Petersburg at the time of the shooting (but who had not featured in Till The End nor Platz Eins) began to recieve hate mail and threats online after being identified through their selfie photos with him on Instagram.

Porn actresses are often deanonymized and threatened death and you offer paperwork.

If they're collecting money, be it W-2 or 1099, they have to disclose their real name and social security number as it is to whoever is paying them, for tax purposes. Generally to the studio hiring them, but if they publish directly to a monetized platform, they'd have to provide the same to the website as part of collecting their share of ad revenue. So there's really no excuse for PornHub not to either directly verify performers or verify that publishers have all of the performers credentials in order.

Beyond that, of course, it's important for adult actors to be able to be represented publicly solely by their stage name. PornHub knowing both actually adds an additional protective layer, as PornHub could filter/block appearances of their legal name.

I definitely agree the court system should uphold pseudonyms and anonymity when revealing their legal name in public records and hearings has the potential for significant harm, but that's a very different issue than the record-keeping that adult film producers are already required to do.

I think/hope that properly implemented platform will not/should not keep real names. That's for payment provider which is hopefully PCI DSS compliant, not for a random porn site. Idea of porn sites keeping real model identities terrifies me.

I am not sure you can legally pay someone a taxable amount of money in the United States[1] without knowing their real name. Porn sites like PornHub probably don't have the real life info for performers who are employed by an adult film studio, but in those cases, the adult film studios definitely have that info. For anyone who publishes their own content directly to PornHub and monetizes it, it's likely PornHub has to have their real information.

[1] Similarly true many other places, though MindGeek's Wikipedia page suggests they maintain offices in a large number of island countries for tax evasion purposes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com