Gregory's ServerWe've updated the rules of our flagship server mastodon.social today. Most are the same with some clarifications, but one rule is new: Content created by others must be attributed, and use of AI must be disclosed. Profiles that only post AI-generated content will not be tolerated.
Eugen Rochko
137 comments
 
ROTOPE~1 :yell:
fedithom
Please do away with @tatianasys Thank you kindly @Gargron
The Queen of Weltschmerz🏳️⚧️
@stux @Gargron Full disclosure- I use AI to generate my avatars, because I have the artistic talent of a housebrick; seriously, my cat could do a better job- and I don’t have a cat. I do discuss it on my profile page, and I happily acknowledge the artists whose work has been used to train the model, but if AI gives you hives, best to ignore my posts.
stux⚡
@rebelrebel62 That's no worry ❤️ For a single avatar it's not needed 😉 it's meant for the "mostly-AI" posters or more often at least 
Flock of Cats 🐈 🐈 🐈 🌸
does this also apply to accounts that exist to “curate” (ie, steal) non-AI stuff like videos, shorts, and gifs from around the web without attribution? That seems like it would apply to a good number of active accounts.
stux⚡
@FlockOfCats This is an "AI specific' rule 😉 Stealing content would fall under the illegal content rule
Jeff
@stux @Gargron A lot of the artwork that our band uses has some involvement with AI when it’s created. It might not solely be used to create our art, but we do use some AI. Are you saying that we will be required to let everyone know that the Artwork we use for the albums we make has some AI used to make it? Doesn’t that seem like something Bandcamp should be curating and not Mastodon?
Jeff
@stux @Gargron Again, to clarify, if we take a painting that we made, and then we use AI to abstract the painting or make it look stranger than it already was, we are still using AI. Your suggesting that we can’t take a painting we made, which in some cases is just swirls of different color paint, but then, add some kind of cartoon like overlay to it all, or maybe just make it look psychedelic or strange. Again, still using AI, and it is artwork. These rules are not clear.   
AlinskyDidNothingWrong
@Gargron progress towards an organic certification for online content, awesome.   
Stephen Michael Kellat
@popey Good point. I think I understand the goal but implementation would be a mess.  
Tante Anja
@Gargron Half the time it's impossible to find the artist. The other half it's impossible to see wether or not it's AI. I get the need for similar rules but fear for a lot of false reports and people bugging their fellow donners to no end about images without sources, just for funsies.
a Sapoconcha Tradutora
@HeyLaiverd @Gargron When it's impossible to find the author, I've seen many folks post something along the lines of "Not mine, found it on [insert website/social network name here] and couldn't find the author, if you know the author let me know!". Would that be enough in the way of attribution?
a Sapoconcha Tradutora
@HeyLaiverd @Gargron Followed, of course, by actually editing to attribute once someone lets you know who the author is.
Claire @LVFC 🌴
@HeyLaiverd @Gargron you can very easily say "artist unknown" or "please help me ID the artist". Just don't post it with no context and people think it's yours! 
David Marshall
This works. I did this once back on the dead bird site, before it was all Musked up. Found the artist. Attributed their work. Followed them. 
Lars Marowsky-Brée 😷
@Gargron Thank you, I'm completely in favor. And yet I wonder how that'll even be enforced, since there's no reliable way to automatically detect these 😕 
Moved
I imagine it's report based, as with everything else. If someone gets reported for breaking this rule, a moderator verifies that the rule is broken and takes action.
Lars Marowsky-Brée 😷
@bloodykneelers I'm not sure that helps necessarily, because even a human moderator will have a hard time verifying this. 
Sean Heber
@Gargron I think this is a generally good move, but I hope this rule doesn't accidentally ban memes.
Eugen Rochko
@bigzaphod Memes are not the target of this rule. There's quite an obvious difference between a meme and someone reposting someone else's artwork without credit.
Sean Heber
@Gargron I was hoping that was the case and it was targeted at artwork and the like. Thanks for the clarification! 
et konsept fra BAR
@Gargron @bigzaphod I hope the actual rule is phrased differently from your recap of it here, then. Because saying all content crested by others must be attributed does ban memes, and lots of other things, no matter the intention behind it.
Eugen Rochko
@forteller @bigzaphod It's not a magic spell that will automatically prevent you from posting memes. It just gives us wiggle room to moderate reported content.
et konsept fra BAR
@Gargron Rules needs to say what they are actually meant to say. If not that is when they are like a "magic spell" that anyone with power (mods) can interpret to go after the ones they want to go after and not go after those they don't want to. If you know what you want to ban then just write exactly that, if you don't know talk with people and work it out. Please. @bigzaphod     
Steve Troughton-Smith
@Gargron *strongly* disagree with that last one, when full disclosure is provided. Cuts off all kinds of interesting use cases and bots (like automated support for apps), and means if you do talk about generative art you can’t post it to a secondary profile to spare your main feed followers. Like it or not, mastodon.social *is* Mastodon to an awful lot of people, and this effectively becomes a blanket ban. I certainly wouldn't be posting here if I had to be on another instance 
Bill Vinson
@stroughtonsmith @Gargron Similar to my thoughts. It seems like it really should depend (for profiles only posting AI-generated content) on what the AI-generated content is…. Posting only prompts and the weird art that was generated? In my view, bring it on 😃 
Feyter
@stroughtonsmith @Gargron I don't get the last part. Why wouldn't you post on Mastodon (or Fediverse in general?) if you would be on a different instance? This is part of the federated principle. Why do you want to limit mastodon to a single instance?
Edgar M. Toro :mstdnca:
Great initiative. Would it be possible to enforce a standard tag (or set of tags) for AI generated content?
Maven :neocat_flag_demigirl:
@Gargron@mastodon.social as much as i dont like mastodon.social for it being too big even for a flagship instance, this isnt a bad idea good job everyone should implement this
Feyter
@Gargron obviously a joke :) and a hint on that many "newspaper websites" no longer write the articles themselves and instead let AI generate the content... But to be honest. I don't need such "news" here so it would be fine for me if they are getting blocked. I can still see some potential "problems" about this in the future. 
Matthew Maybe
@Gargron if you (or anyone else) is looking for a solution for detecting undisclosed AI-generated content on your server, please contact me. I built the first AI art detector, and love Mastodon, and would be happy to help.  
Rachel Lawson
@Gargron how do we define ”ai generated” in a world where the major phone cameras all use ai techniques to enhance the photos taken?  
Ricky Romero
@Gargron Would this policy exclude @bustletonauto were they to change servers to the flagship? It seems like the new rule isn’t meant to target profiles like this, but the way the rule is written leaves no room for it 
Brick Duck
@Gargron One of the first things I interacted with on mastodon was a little bot that would post a poll, then generate an image based on the winning option. It was clearly marked as AI, I think those kind of things should still be allowed. A blanket "profiles that only post ai-generated content will not be tolerated" is too strict. 
🇺🇦 haxadecimal
@Gargron Natural Stupdity is still allowed, and even encouraged. I like the new rule. 
Lil Meow Meow
Does it suffice the rules if I post a picture that has a watermark with the originator's account or the artist's/photographer's name?
NorCal Lynne
@Gargron thank you 😊 really happy about the attribution part, too many accounts scrape content, with the artist getting no acknowledgment.  
Chancerubbage
@Gargron so… Someone posts a meme /gif/or clip of Meryl Streep at an awards show, just as a claque bot might. As I just saw in the replies here. Perhaps the alt text is chock full of attributions. Will that be considered ‘content created by others, needing full attribution’, or, fair use?  
BeAware :veriweed:
@Gargron okay, then. Profiles that only take payouts from Meta and refuse to add actual useful moderation tools to services they've created, will be ignored and not be taken seriously. 🖕
Ian Langham
@Gargron as a traditional artist, I can't thank you enough. I deeply appreciate the changes. Thank you.
DNA schedule
@Gargron how does this interact with memes? Would posting a reaction image without crediting the photographer be a violation? 
Tucker Carlson's Nuts
@Gargron
postmasters
@Gargron I don't care for adms making rules for the pubic. The better way is for the adms to agree to submit to the rule of a constitution. @davevolek #constitution #democracy @democracy @DemocracyNow_Headlines_rss 
Kristoffer Lawson
@Gargron completely against the #AI rules. AI is a tool. What does it matter if you use it to create content? Any more than if it was created with Pixelmator or emacs. Allow people to be creative however they want. And a blanket ban against accounts posting only AI stuff, even if disclosed? A lot of funny meme stuff and interesting bots are now banned. This policy would not make me want to post from #mastodon.social.
Oleg Shanyuk
@Gargron marking AI content is a good start. Happens, some researchers publish only results of their work, which can be interesting, yet, violates the statement of tolerance. Perhaps, it’s okay to let people decide what they want to follow? Or im missing a good context behind the statement?   
The Mïghty Kräcken
@Gargron will it be a problem if I post random memes that I find online that have no attribution? 
Sander van Kasteel
@Gargron does this also apply for the mastodon.online server? Edit: grammar be hard in the morning.    
Markus Werle
@Gargron What exactly is AI? Every single photo I shoot with a Google #Pixel or an #iphone has undergone extreme postproduction from the device itself. Every image that is taken by a #DSLR and then piped through #Photoshop has #AI applied to it. Where is the fine line to the zone where we need not to disclose the usage of #AI?
Andrea Grandi 🦕
@Gargron Mastodon's Translate feature uses DeepL, which uses AI to provide the translation. Does it break the new rule or is it a special case? 
RealGene ☣️
@Gargron Not happening.  
Eugen Rochko
@tennoseremel Mass reports don't matter. All reports are reviewed by human moderators, and the quantity does not play a role. 
Deadly Headshot
@Gargron
Festive Leo ✨🇺🇦
@Gargron This is great! It echoes the "No meme spam accounts" and "No AI sludge accounts" rules from my little personal instance
Jenni Olson (she/her/TBD)
@Gargron Really great to see this - especially the clarifications around anti-LGBTQ content and behavior (No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, xenophobia, or casteism. Transphobic behavior such as intentional misgendering and deadnaming is strictly prohibited. Promotion of "conversion therapy" is strictly prohibited.) https://mastodon.social/@glaad/112128406996833550
theNE
@Gargron I don't quite understand why it is one rule, not two separate ones. 1) "Content created by others must be attributed" - makes sense. But these are two unrelated rules to me. Putting them together only creates confusion. |
@Gargron
mstdn.social, masto.ai & mastodon.coffee will do the same! ⚠️ :mastodon: