Live data from Hacker News

YouTube Unleashed a Conspiracy Theory Boom. Can It Be Contained?

nytimes.com

81–87 of 87 posts

Re: YouTube Unleashed a Conspiracy Theory Boom. Can It Be Contained?

#81
post #78
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because people view it as harmful. If even one person thumbs their nose at science because some idiot on YouTube told them that gravity can't be real because "water always finds its level", that is causing harm. If even one person takes Alex Jones's ramblings about the Sandy Hook victims seriously, and perhaps starts sending texts threatening the victims (which actually happened), that is causing harm. It's not hard…

The thing you are not considering here is that in this world of censorship you now need a 'Ministry of Truth.' Let's consider Google and the NYTimes. The NYTimes was one of the loudest cheerleaders for the war in Iraq. They unquestionably ran stories advocating and spreading our likely fabricated "evidence" even though a critical examination would likely have revealed some serious questions, but they chose either not…

It's amazing how "the US government successfully misled everyone to invade Iraq" now justifies the world being flat.

This seems to be being mentioned more and more these days, too. It's as if it's the only thing people learned from the war, and they blame the media for it.

Re: YouTube Unleashed a Conspiracy Theory Boom. Can It Be Contained?

#82
post #80
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing you are not considering here is that in this world of censorship you now need a 'Ministry of Truth.' Let's consider Google and the NYTimes. The NYTimes was one of the loudest cheerleaders for the war in Iraq. They unquestionably ran stories advocating and spreading our likely fabricated "evidence" even though a critical examination would likely have revealed some serious questions, but they chose either not…

Sure, but this is under the assumption that the information is being censored, which I don't think anyone in this conversation is calling for. I'm certainly not suggesting that flat-earthers be jailed for believing in something really stupid, and certainly I'd never support them being shutdown in a public venue unless they got violent. That said, and as I've kept repeating, YouTube and Google are not government entit…

YouTube has 1.8 billion monthly users - nearly one quarter of the entire human species' population. They have about 550% the population of the USA inside their 'house.' They have hundreds of millions more users than the largest country in the world has citizens. I think the only thing analogs to household (or even most business) rules emphasize is how inappropriate they are to considering what the most reasonable action in this sort of scenario is.

YouTube is a natural monopoly which changes the whole picture. It even works as a bypass for literal first amendment infringement from the government. Imagine a government entity wanted to prohibit discussion of a given topic. In past times, their only option would be to try to pass legislation against it. That's where the first amendment kicks in. In modern digital times, however, there's another option. They can simply apply pressure or offer incentives to e.g. Google and Facebook to ensure it ends up on their black lists. It's a clear violation of the spirit of the constitution without clearly violating the constitution. None of these issues came up when considering the constitution as the concept of things such as a private company having a monopoly on public discourse would be completely nonsensical.

I think it's completely unavoidable that the next socioeconomic movement of society will be to an overt corporatocracy. That's disappointing, but it is what it is. The only thing I wish is that people would realize is that these steps are exactly how we get there. This all effectively comes down to not only simply accepting a monopoly of this scale, but now further suggesting that this monopoly begin ensuring that the discourse is 'corporate approved'. I'm certain YouTube will be thrilled to comply.

Re: YouTube Unleashed a Conspiracy Theory Boom. Can It Be Contained?

#83
post #82
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but this is under the assumption that the information is being censored, which I don't think anyone in this conversation is calling for. I'm certainly not suggesting that flat-earthers be jailed for believing in something really stupid, and certainly I'd never support them being shutdown in a public venue unless they got violent. That said, and as I've kept repeating, YouTube and Google are not government entit…

YouTube has 1.8 billion monthly users - nearly one quarter of the entire human species' population. They have about 550% the population of the USA inside their 'house.' They have hundreds of millions more users than the largest country in the world has citizens. I think the only thing analogs to household (or even most business) rules emphasize is how inappropriate they are to considering what the most reasonable act…

I feel like you pivoted on your point.

Sure, I have an issue with YouTube being a near-monopoly too, and if the discussion came down to "YouTube is deleting videos for ideological reasons", I think your point would stand.

In this case, however, the issue came down to their recommendation engine. Even if you did view YouTube as a government entity, which I do not, I don't think it says anywhere in the constitution that the government has to give recommendation to every side of the argument, just that you're allowed to say it.

All that being said, I actually have been working on and off on a clone of YouTube using distributed hash tables, so maybe we'll be off of it soon enough :)

Re: YouTube Unleashed a Conspiracy Theory Boom. Can It Be Contained?

#84
post #56
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supposing that's true where's the harm there? why should we restrict "speech" because of your colleague's beliefs?

I am in no way shape or form advocating for restricting speech. I speaking strictly to whether or not he believes it. I believe he believes it. But it's impossible for me to know. I make no assertion other than that.

Does he have a youtube channel?

Re: YouTube Unleashed a Conspiracy Theory Boom. Can It Be Contained?

#85
post #83
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube has 1.8 billion monthly users - nearly one quarter of the entire human species' population. They have about 550% the population of the USA inside their 'house.' They have hundreds of millions more users than the largest country in the world has citizens. I think the only thing analogs to household (or even most business) rules emphasize is how inappropriate they are to considering what the most reasonable act…

I feel like you pivoted on your point. Sure, I have an issue with YouTube being a near-monopoly too, and if the discussion came down to "YouTube is deleting videos for ideological reasons", I think your point would stand. In this case, however, the issue came down to their recommendation engine. Even if you did view YouTube as a government entity, which I do not, I don't think it says anywhere in the constitution tha…

I definitely did pivot, but you did as well. You swapped between Google should censor to Google can censor. These are quite different issues, though they frequently end up intermingled, as in our chat.

Efforts at competition should not be neglected, but I think it will likely prove futile. There are already plenty of alternatives to YouTube, but that doesn't matter with a natural monopoly. Content producers want to go where viewers are. Viewers want to go where content producers are. Whoever becomes the 'big one' first, wins.

There's a fundamental problem. That is that content intended to be free by users is something that private companies then claim effective ownership of as a condition of being able to say anything. This is an interesting 'trick'. I call it a trick because let's say the average person posts something to e.g. Facebook or YouTube. Would they mind if another site, with attribution, also shared their content? In the vast majority of cases, the answer would be no. Most people are just posting things for enjoyment or to express themselves, they'd love if it got shared as much as possible. But other sites cannot share these users' content because e.g. YouTube or Facebook claim and defend exclusive ownership of what is posted on their site. You'd need to get a user's express permission to share their content, and that's not really viable.

Imagine for a second that we killed this trick. Companies that provide user generated content for free, or with a free account, could only publish content under non-free licenses if the content creator specifically opted in to that agreement. However, even if they chose to not opt-in the company would still be obligated to publish and treat their content identically to how they would have if the user had opted in. This would all go away if the company charged even $0.01 for access. The company could also incentivize users to opt-in, such as by paying them up front for their content.

The idea is to turn "free" into simply free. This would enable real competition since free access means somebody could simply start copying content created by users who wanted to post free content on e.g. YouTube or Facebook and share it in a different venue. The exact same would be true of comments and other such user generated content that was always intended to be free, and not "free", to begin with.

But so long as a monopoly is able to claim effective ownership of material users meant to be free, this system will likely only grow larger.

Re: YouTube Unleashed a Conspiracy Theory Boom. Can It Be Contained?

#86
post #27

There's been an uptick in conspiracy theories lately, I kinda blame the whole "mainstream media lies" movement. Some people are starting to believe that if almost everyone believes something, it has to be a conspiracy. My favourite one right now is "5G is bad and will kill us all and microwave birds". There is not a single article on 5G without the Facebook comments being full of people shouting about the extreme dan…

the whole 5G radiation conspiracy thing has been going for a long time. I think it's as old as mobile technology itself. Surprising they haven't blamed RF for the disappearance of insects yet. Fwiw probably healthy to be skeptical about blanket statements claiming RF has 0 risks (they do cause brain tumors in rats).

Off-topic: David Dees has some funny (to me hilarious) artwork on his site that describes these conspiracy theories better than words: http://ddees.com/new-art/

The ones about "blockchain" and 5G are so friggin good I've set them as desktop wallpapers :)

http://ddees.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/clown.jpg

http://ddees.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Sheeple-42.jpg

Re: YouTube Unleashed a Conspiracy Theory Boom. Can It Be Contained?

#87

The problem faced is unprecedented soapboxing. Insane ideas have been around as long as humanity. Usually you stand on a soapbox and preach, people ignore you. Some might even disuade others from listening. The problem with online opinions is that while the "opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one" adage is true, online nobody is there to tell you "stop watching this stupid thing". And we all know YT comments…

I've found it almost impossible to remove a specific feed or ideology from my YT recommendations. As an example I once watched Yanis Varoufakis speak at the Oxford Union. He has appeared on panels with Slavoj Zizek who is a person I personally can't stomach. Almost immediately after the Yanis video I had YT recommend me to watch a panel with Zizek and Varoufakis discuss in 2016. I didn't watch it - but since then I get Zizek constantly recommended in my feed. Note I don't use google for searches and my YT is running pretty much isolated in Chrome while I use Firefox/Tor for all other browsing. So google doesn't know me and YT knows me only via my handle that is otherwise not connected to anything (outside YT).

I have countless examples like this. YT keeps pushing me down a specific ideological path without any action on my part. Sometimes it's great but in those cases where it's not it's not just bad but outright dangerous. I don't think YT has the effect on my since I'm way past a point (age) where my behavior can easily be formed. But I can see how this sends somebody over the cliff who is still figuring out who they are.

People like rockstar2016 (aka the MAGA killer) or the woman who went into Youtube HQ and starting shooting the place up were probably a good examples of how social media can radicalize those that are the most vulnerable.

EDIT: “All but one of 30 Flat Earthers interviewed said they hadn't considered the Earth to be flat until watching videos promoting the theory on YouTube” https://www.engadget.com/2019/02/18/researchers-blame-youtub...

Post reply on HN