Skip to main content


We'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.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

mstdn.social, masto.ai & mastodon.coffee will do the same! ⚠️ :mastodon:

Mastodon Migration reshared this.

in reply to stux⚡

Content warning: snark

in reply to Wilfried Klaebe

Content warning: snark

in reply to stux⚡

Content warning: re: snark

in reply to Eugen Rochko

How does one attribute everyone you take from with AI posts? 🤔
in reply to Eugen Rochko

progress towards an organic certification for online content, awesome.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

I'm not sophisticated to know myself but . . .

How will you know if the content is #AI generated or not? 🤔

Is it THAT obvious or do you have "tools" to use that will ID them?

#ai
in reply to Eugen Rochko

I love you. Genuinely. That is a wonderful stance to take.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

fantastic! Hope @mastodon.world will follow suit 👏👏
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

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 😕

in reply to Eugen Rochko

oh crap, I have to figure out attribution for every stupid meme template?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

I think this is a generally good move, but I hope this rule doesn't accidentally ban memes.
in reply to Sean Heber

@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 reshared this.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

I was hoping that was the case and it was targeted at artwork and the like. Thanks for the clarification!
in reply to Eugen Rochko

@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.
in reply to Rule 34

@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.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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
in reply to Eugen Rochko

@bigzaphod

"AI Generated Memes Are The New Thing!!!"


(URL replace addon enabled for X, YouTube, Instagram and some news sites.)

in reply to Eugen Rochko

How about pics you downloaded eons ago and can't recall the source?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

*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
in reply to Eugen Rochko

good! that's just the start with #AI and #genai that will write our thoughts.
:)
#ai #GenAI
in reply to Eugen Rochko

Great initiative. Would it be possible to enforce a standard tag (or set of tags) for AI generated content?
in reply to Feyter

@feyter What do you mean by that? What do newspapers have to do with this?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

Is there some way we're supposed to know about rules changes?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

how do we define ”ai generated” in a world where the major phone cameras all use ai techniques to enhance the photos taken?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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
in reply to Eugen Rochko

This is excellent community leadership. Sincerely.
This entry was edited (3 months ago)
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

Natural Stupdity is still allowed, and even encouraged.
:-)

I like the new rule.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

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?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

thank you 😊 really happy about the attribution part, too many accounts scrape content, with the artist getting no acknowledgment.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

fyi there are news accounts that use ai to filter news stories and post their links. this ai hate boner is weird, man.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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?

in reply to Eugen Rochko

i think ai only accounts could be fine if theyre clearly marked, but i dont make the rules.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

Can you define ‘use of AI must be disclosed’? To generate the content in its entirety? Using generative fill out expand in a photograph? Using a photograph that's composited automatically by my camera? As a writing aid?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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.

🖕

This entry was edited (3 months ago)
in reply to Eugen Rochko

I approve. (I was going to say "if it matters" but whether it does or not, actually.)
in reply to Eugen Rochko

as a traditional artist, I can't thank you enough.

I deeply appreciate the changes.

Thank you.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

how does this interact with memes? Would posting a reaction image without crediting the photographer be a violation?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

This seems rather ignorant. I bet nobody here can even define what AI-generated means in any detail.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

🥥 21 cheers for this new Mastodon.Social policy on disclosing content that uses artificial intelligence.
Eye hope you have inspired many others to follow in your footsteps
Cheers! 🥥
#AI, #Disclosure
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

"Mastodon social media is decentralized in such a way that no central governing party implements rules and regulations. Instead, it allows communities to self-govern."

it seems a little against what mastodon was about.

It's one thing for unique artwork, but things like posting pictures of objects to describe something will be a pain in the ...

How do we also define AI content? Untouched by a human, 10% to 90% changed by a human after generating?

What next.... Community notes?

This entry was edited (3 months ago)
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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?

in reply to Eugen Rochko

Not using AI is resistance, we have always said it. It's not like Matrix did not warn us about it.

Also, AI is terrible for the #climate.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

Good. I hope other large instances follow your lead.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

will it be a problem if I post random memes that I find online that have no attribution?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

does this also apply for the mastodon.online server?

Edit: grammar be hard in the morning.

This entry was edited (3 months ago)
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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?
in reply to Eugen Rochko

"Content created by others must be attributed," This is what the Internet needs: validated and provable provenance. It should be the new copyright: anybody can use my work, but it is still *my work*.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

So… I have to add attribution to those Simpsons gifs I post which I downloaded from wherever I found them?

Not happening.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

It is often impossible to determine who the original creator of an image was, even with a Tin Eye search. 😞 Even if I own the image I copied, such as a 19th century trade card.
in reply to Ténno Seremélʹ

@tennoseremel Mass reports don't matter. All reports are reviewed by human moderators, and the quantity does not play a role.
in reply to Eugen Rochko

The actual details of these rules seem ill thought out and short sighted.
And some, like the AI rules just out right wrong.
(Given a separate rule explicitly allows bot accounts and all modern bots from this point forward will most likely be using LLMs to generate the final text to the end user)

Unfortunately mastodon.social basically IS Mastodon for most people so these rules will have an outsized effect.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

How widely does "AI-generated" apply? Is it just LLMs and Dali-like image generators or does it include bots that reply to people? (I forget if they're allowed here at all, TBH, but I know people do run them)...
in reply to Eugen Rochko

This is great! It echoes the "No meme spam accounts" and "No AI sludge accounts" rules from my little personal instance
in reply to Eugen Rochko

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


This is huge 👏 Mastodon's flagship server (@Mastodon) has made it clear that targeted misgendering and deadnaming, as well as promotion of “conversion therapy” content is prohibited. As GLAAD has noted, all social media platforms should do the same.

“Conversion therapy” is also a harmful practice that attempts to change an LGBTQ person’s sexual orientation and/or gender identity. It’s great to see Mastodon stand up to say that anti-LGBTQ hate has no place on its platform.

Updated server rules:


This entry was edited (3 months ago)
in reply to Eugen Rochko

I don't quite understand why it is one rule, not two separate ones.

1) "Content created by others must be attributed" - makes sense.
2) "Use of AI must be disclosed" - well, many people are tired of the #AIart flood, so, okay, maybe makes sense too.

But these are two unrelated rules to me. Putting them together only creates confusion.

in reply to Eugen Rochko

"Profiles that only post AI-generated content will not be tolerated."

What exactly is such a profile? One whose every single post is an AI image without any comments? Or pretty much any account that specializes on #AIart, and to what degree of AI usage?

in reply to Eugen Rochko

How are users of the server supposed to know about rules updates?