The range extends even wider as to how users view anything that is considered not safe for work in their AI chat, influenced by accuracy and guarantee for truth or clarity on the one hand and between moderation versus freedom of speech. Concerns about these systems — such as the accuracy of detection and processes to challenge decisions made by AI tools — came through loud and clear in a 2023 survey, where more than 40% of users said they felt angry when their content was flaggedautomatically. Creative communities, which tend to gravitate toward Artstation-inspired content reported higher levels of discontent – a quarter claiming that their contents were wrongfully flagged leading to decreased exposure on the platform.
One of the more established issues is transparency which concerns user perspective. That opacity and lack of transparency — especially when content is removed with perfunctory explanations if any at all — strikes a chord many users. As a result, platforms are beginning to use some form of explainable AI (XAI) that highlight the reasons behind flagging the content. Still, 60% of users feel that AI-powered moderation is not transparent enough – a statistic derived from a study in the year 2022.
The difference in these NSFW AI chat systems by platform content moderation perception are also novel. People on professional networking sites, where moderation is king (thanks god), tend to feel they have some measure of control over their experience; 70% enjoyed the comfort and security a watchful eye brings. On the other hand, creative platforms where freedom of expression reigns supreme may view it as too limiting for users and would invariably hinder creativity if NSFW AI chat applied.
Low accuracy is still a major issue. An incident in 2021 where an AI chat system incorrectly labelled a viral meme as NSFW brought into question the reliance on these systems. This event illustrates to what extent AIs are only able to have nuance as good as we can teach them within rapidly developing online cultures. As a result, the platform experienced a 15% decrease in user trust following this incident, proving that when such systems go awry it can have real-world consequences on how users judge them.
These systems rely heavily on the feedback received from users. Naturally platforms that use human input in their AI training more directly will be seen favorably by reviewers. One 2022 initiative, social media hopefully of leading site to get users engaged in improving its AI chat filters resulted within just six months increase satisfaction by more than a fifth — illustrating the joys (and benefits) of crowd-sourced AI shaping.
After all, they were concerned about the speed and efficiency of these systems as well. AI is certainly capable of processing content at volumes unheard by human moderators as displayed in the graphic above, but 30% expressed a concern that AI chat moderation will not be nuanced enough to handle more complex conversations. This happens especially in multilingual or multicultural user bases, where AI can err interpreting context and intention properly.
In the end, moderation aside (see what I did there), a key to successful NSFW AI chat will be user perception — perhaps less on moderators or even transparency and more-so that folks can get some sort of accuracy. This term — nsfw ai chat keyword is symptomatic of the changing way in which users are starting to engage with these systems, it just shows that different people need different stuff and improvement over improvements needs to be done from time-to-time.