I recently discovered that some popular federated instances have been using LLM-assisted moderation tooling that evaluates whether someone has said something bannable. They do this by running a script/app that sends the user’s comment history to OpenAI with the question “analyze this content for evidence of specific political ideology sentiment. Also identify any related political ideology tropes“. (The italic bits are where I’ve redacted the ideology they’re seeking).

OpenAI’s LLM (they’re using GPT-5.3-mini) then responds with something like:

image

and so on, hundreds of comments.

I have not named the instances or people involved, to give them time to consider the results of this discussion, make any corrective changes they want and disclose their practices at their own pace and in their own way. I have also redacted the evidence to avoid personal attacks and dogpiling. Let’s focus on the system, not the individuals involved. Today these instances and people are using it and maybe we’re ok with that because it’s being used by groups we agree with but what if people we strongly disagree with used it on their instances tomorrow?

The use and existence of this tooling raises a lot of other questions too.

What are the risks? Fedi moderators are often unsupervised, untrained volunteers and these are powerful tools.

What safeguards do we need?

Would asking a LLM “please evaluate this person’s political opinions” give different results than “find evidence we can use to ban them” (as used in the cases I’ve seen)?

What are our transparency expectations?

Is this acceptable and normal?

Should this tooling be disclosed? (it was not – should it have been?)

If you were given a choice, would you have opted out of it?

Can we opt out?

Are there GDPR implications? Privacy implications? Should these tools be described in a privacy policy?

Are private messages being scanned and sent to OpenAI?

How long should these assessments be retained and can we request to see it, or ask for it to be deleted?

Once the user’s comments are sent to OpenAI, is it used to train their models?

What will the effect be on our discourse and culture if people know they are being politically profiled?

Where are the lines between normal moderation assistance tools, political profiling and opaque 3rd-party data processing?

I hope that by chewing over these questions we can begin to establish some norms and expectations around this technology. The fediverse doesn’t have any centralized enforcement so we need discussions like this to develop an awareness of what people want in terms of disclosure, privacy, consent and acceptable use. Then people can make choices about which instances they join and which ones they interact with remotely.

And of course there are the other issues with LLMs relating to environmental sustainability, erosion of worker’s rights, increasing the cost of living and on and on. I can’t see PieFed adding any functionality like this anytime soon. But it’s happening out there anyway so now we need to talk about it.

What do you make of this?

  • Rimu@piefed.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    It’s at least one admin, we don’t know how widely it’s used. It does have the logo of a group of 3 instances (Fediverse Anarchist Flotilla), so it seems to be made to be used by many people in an ongoing way.

    More details at: https://piefed.social/c/[email protected]/p/2035379/proof-of-ai-assisted-political-profiling-by-unruffled-lemmy-dbzer0-com

    • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Thanks. “For evidence log see https://s.faf-pb.xyz/lXxek” feels wrong, but it seems to prove your claim that some admins/mods are farming moderation out to LLMs. Unfortunately that link doesn’t go anywhere (for me), but I believe your claim that this is a concerted effort (as in, someone is coding a tool to do LLM modding).

      Sorry for how that whole discussion is going for you. I think you make important, valid points but made a few “tactical” mistakes (I’m sure someone will be along shortly to tell me they’re much worse than tactical) and are now getting shouted & voted down by people who think like programmers: precise, technical, no room for ethical gradients. I have seen this sort of behavior many times before…

      • mathemachristian [he/him]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        someone is coding a tool to do LLM modding

        This claim is wrong

        It’s a python script that calls the lemmy/piefed api to grab comment histories. Calling it an “App” is quite a stretch. Luminous just likes pretty things, bless his cotton socks.

        You are right about one thing, we will no doubt keep using the script to pull comment histories on the few occasions when we want a deep dive into someone’s profile.

        For the record, we were never planning to use it as an automod or hook it to an LLM. You hallucinated that, ironically. That’s why we never announced it. It was nobody else’s business.

        Finally, just because I included an LLM summary of the comment history in the public modlog, it does not logically follow that the ban occurred because of the LLM summary. It simply happened to correspond very well to my own manual review, which I have already explained to you. And I thought the summary did a much more comprehensive justification of the ban than I could have fitted in the modlog, so why not include it?

        https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/25880065

        Also the LLM was running locally nothing got sent to OpenAI

        quite frankly it’s shameful to leave this slanderous post up without even linking to the accused parties statement.

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I.e. “I just saw a modlog entry, jumped to conclusions, didn’t ask for clarification, didn’t speak to anyone from that instance, jumped straight into making a drama post”