[intended]

I’ve worked in trust and safety - for me this is stupid, but well below the threshold of impossible.

Hell, I know of a major firm that decided QA was not needed for their trust and safety process.

Another common issue will be SEA Arabic speakers tasked with labelling Middle Eastern Arabic content, because accents and cultural dialects are not a thing.

I’ve had people at FAANG firms cry on my shoulder, because they couldn’t get access to engineering resources at their own firms.

There was the famous case of meta executives overriding T&S policy and telling them that what content was news worthy during the Boston bombing. On a separate incident, they told their team that cartel violence was not newsworthy when friends in London complained about it.

When you say this is fantasy, what do you mean precisely?

[ryandrake]

What I mean is: I'm not sure what they base their statement that it's "a common practice among other companies" on. Unlikely they are talking about their peer companies. I suppose if you read the sentence literally, there surely exist one or more "other companies" in the broad universe of "other companies" that routinely do this kind of stuff. But I wouldn't think anywhere serious.

[intended]

I mean, given this happened and it was sent to Sama it seems pretty clear that the images being generated from this were being sent to a labelling pipeline somewhere.

There’s probably an opt out / opt in clause somewhere in the terms and conditions, which makes it feasible for Meta (and other firms) to use this data.

[abustamam]

Meta could at least pretend that they don't intend to capture people in their most intimate and vulnerable moments instead of slobbering on the sideline like "mm... Data..."