How much responsibility should fall on the platform itself versus the user?
I’ve been thinking a lot about where platforms should draw the line with AI that alters images, especially when it changes how real people are represented. I work with digital content, and lately I’ve seen more tools that blur the boundary between creativity and misuse. It makes me uneasy because intent isn’t always obvious. How much responsibility should fall on the platform itself versus the user, and is moderation even realistic at scale?
11 Views
This is something I’ve run into as well, mostly from a moderation and product-design angle. On paper, platforms say “users are responsible,” but in practice that doesn’t really hold up. If a tool is clearly designed to manipulate images of real people, the platform already knows the risks. I looked into services like Clothoff for Undress AI out of professional curiosity, not to use it, but to understand the UX and safeguards. What stood out to me wasn’t just the tech, but how lightly consequences are explained. From my experience managing online communities, clear friction points help: explicit consent reminders, visible watermarks, and limited processing of real faces. Without those, abuse becomes predictable, not accidental. I don’t think banning everything is the answer, but platforms should actively design for ethical use instead of reacting only after problems appear.