Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 272 posts

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#141

Post by [deleted] »

tmorton wrote: post #131
pjc50 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As has been pointed out, in lots of areas a "balanced" view doesn't make sense. I'm reminded of the judgement of Solomon dictating that, to settle a dispute between two women as to whom a baby belonged to, it should be cut in half and they be given half each. For a lot of social issues, being given the midpoint solution is like being given half a baby. "All humans are created equal and endowed with rights" is a radic…

> For a lot of social issues, being given the midpoint solution is like being given half a baby. I think this cuts to the heart of the issue - and demonstrates the problem with this line of thinking. I also think you're missing the point of the Solomon story. When Solomon proposed that solution, one woman said "No, no - give her the baby." That woman was willing to compromise. She was willing to compromise all the wa…

[deleted]

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#142

Post by _8j50 »

tmorton wrote: post #131
pjc50 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As has been pointed out, in lots of areas a "balanced" view doesn't make sense. I'm reminded of the judgement of Solomon dictating that, to settle a dispute between two women as to whom a baby belonged to, it should be cut in half and they be given half each. For a lot of social issues, being given the midpoint solution is like being given half a baby. "All humans are created equal and endowed with rights" is a radic…

> For a lot of social issues, being given the midpoint solution is like being given half a baby. I think this cuts to the heart of the issue - and demonstrates the problem with this line of thinking. I also think you're missing the point of the Solomon story. When Solomon proposed that solution, one woman said "No, no - give her the baby." That woman was willing to compromise. She was willing to compromise all the wa…

I think he got the point just fine. She was willing to compromise because half a baby is a dead baby. She would compromise on whether or not the baby was in her possesion but she could not compromise on the state of the baby.

It is better to lose the whole war than to lose what you value the most. Losing could mean many things,not just loss of possession.

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#143

Post by lotsofpulp »

tmorton wrote: post #131
pjc50 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As has been pointed out, in lots of areas a "balanced" view doesn't make sense. I'm reminded of the judgement of Solomon dictating that, to settle a dispute between two women as to whom a baby belonged to, it should be cut in half and they be given half each. For a lot of social issues, being given the midpoint solution is like being given half a baby. "All humans are created equal and endowed with rights" is a radic…

> For a lot of social issues, being given the midpoint solution is like being given half a baby. I think this cuts to the heart of the issue - and demonstrates the problem with this line of thinking. I also think you're missing the point of the Solomon story. When Solomon proposed that solution, one woman said "No, no - give her the baby." That woman was willing to compromise. She was willing to compromise all the wa…

Can you provide a specific example(s) of a side sacrificing a deeper issue in order to win, in recent history? I'm having trouble coming up with examples.

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#144

Post by ekianjo »

watwut wrote: post #133
ekianjo wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if I watch a video on vegetarianism, then another one, it may strengthen the confidence that I am interested in vegetarianism, and conclude that they should be recommending me more content about vegetarianism Recommendation algorithms don't "conclude" anything though, they are merely statistical tools to ensure you get somewhat relevant content, but they are never perfect because there is a lot of noise in what eve…

Not perfect is understatement They are horrible. Not just because of what the article is about, but because their recommendations are ridiculous avwn outside political content. And youtube rules also motivate providers to churn out a lot of content regularly (leading to quick to produce crap) and punish those who take their time to think or research before they talk.

>Not perfect is understatement They are horrible.

They would be much less horrible if every time one watched videos, they would rate them in a way, instead of assuming that "watching"="interest".

> And youtube rules also motivate providers to churn out a lot of content regularly (leading to quick to produce crap) and punish those who take their time to think or research before they talk.

That's not just Youtube: about all media is driven by what's "new" and "hyped" rather than what is deep and well thought about.

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#145

Post by _8j50 »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #126
pjc50 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As has been pointed out, in lots of areas a "balanced" view doesn't make sense. I'm reminded of the judgement of Solomon dictating that, to settle a dispute between two women as to whom a baby belonged to, it should be cut in half and they be given half each. For a lot of social issues, being given the midpoint solution is like being given half a baby. "All humans are created equal and endowed with rights" is a radic…

So radical positions are okay as long as you're right? Who gets to say who is right? For every position that we think is good radical now, there are many more that were not. A slow moving, boring society is one I'd like to live in. Exciting times make for short lives.

Yes. They're ok. You decide to chose what belief system to subsccribe to,and the highest authority within your belief system decides right and wrong(absolute right and wrongs being decided by absolute authority)

While you're bored and comfortable,others are in horrific pain and suffering.

It seems you prefer comfort and well being over doing what's right. In essence,if you (not society) believe doing something is right,you should at the very least not be be vocally against others who are doing it.

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#146

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #126
pjc50 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As has been pointed out, in lots of areas a "balanced" view doesn't make sense. I'm reminded of the judgement of Solomon dictating that, to settle a dispute between two women as to whom a baby belonged to, it should be cut in half and they be given half each. For a lot of social issues, being given the midpoint solution is like being given half a baby. "All humans are created equal and endowed with rights" is a radic…

So radical positions are okay as long as you're right? Who gets to say who is right? For every position that we think is good radical now, there are many more that were not. A slow moving, boring society is one I'd like to live in. Exciting times make for short lives.

[deleted]

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#147

Post by Retra »

claydavisss wrote: post #118
benbenolson wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1791L? How is that an "extreme position?"

Right...very few people seem able to differentiate "radical" views with views they merely oppose. What does "radical" even mean? Opinions that are not part of the present consensus? How is society supposed to evolve? A society that cannot express "radical" views with society's support may eventually express these ideas violently. The downvote button only works for so long.

And what facts do you base these assertions on?

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#149

Post by bilbo0s »

malvosenior wrote: post #134
ChristianBundy wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you be willing to expand on which radical progressive positions ended up being bad? I'd especially be interested to hear examples from the US.

That you can't be racist against white people and you can't be sexist against men. That's a core tenant of western progressivism and does nothing but breed hostility, and denigrate people based on features they were born with. Also see the other HN thread from today about left wing censorship and anti-science: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17938318

This is an example of what the article is discussing. Essentially, content on open platforms, (this thread), tend to link to more extremist content, (the thread you're pointing out). Then that content links to more extremist content, and on and on and so on and so forth.

So your comment is a good "for instance" of why YouTube does what it does as an algorithm. In essence, what YouTube's algorithm does is the exact same thing that we, as humans, do in any given discussion. We just don't get to the extremist content as fast as YouTube's algorithms get us there, so we don't notice that tendency in our face to face discussions.

In a very real way, YouTube is trying to be more human. With all of the negative implications that entails.

Re: YouTube's tendency to push everyday users toward politically extreme content

#150

Post by prolikewh0a »

malvosenior wrote: post #134
ChristianBundy wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you be willing to expand on which radical progressive positions ended up being bad? I'd especially be interested to hear examples from the US.

That you can't be racist against white people and you can't be sexist against men. That's a core tenant of western progressivism and does nothing but breed hostility, and denigrate people based on features they were born with. Also see the other HN thread from today about left wing censorship and anti-science: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17938318

Those aren't progressive positions at all, those are internet bred radical identity politics issues that have nothing to do with progressivism, and stem out of liberalism which is meant to further divide the country. Most people on the true left wouldn't identify with those positions.

Edit: People downvoting need to look at a political spectrum of the left and research the viewpoints of progressive, democratic socialist, and socialist individuals in history. They would all denounce these radical identity politics positions as liberalism that don't end up helping anyone in any way -- especially joining together the working class. This only splits the working class. Identity politics is liberalism and liberalism is very close to centrism, not left politics.

>On Thursday, March 14, 78 “non-black” leaders traveled to Atlanta from 17 states for a planning meeting of the Poor People’s Campaign Steering Committee. They came from Native American, Mexican American, Puerto Rican, and white communities, representing 53 organizations. “It has been one of my dreams that we would come together,” King told the gathering. Their “declaration of unanimous support” for the Poor People’s Campaign, writes Stewart Burns, was “a breakthrough of major proportions, the high point of the entire campaign.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/04/mlk-las...

Fred Hampton on Race: https://youtu.be/fJSqZrVjDds?t=1m14s

Identity Politics is incompatible with progressive or further left politics.

Post reply on HN