YouTube bans comments on all videos of children

Post by Mirioron » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 10:19 PM UTC

_wmd wrote: post #197

notatoad wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are their other options? Imagine they could, with great accuracy, predict whether somebody is going to leave a good comment or a bad one. Do they expose that to the commenter, saying they've been blocked from commenting because the algorithm thinks they're a shitty person? Imagine the optics of that... The other option is the shadowban, where toxic commenters are hidden without notice. It sounds like a good idea…

If the structure of the service offering exceeds the limits of available technology, then the structure of the service is at fault and needs to change -- wishing away the bad people doesn't work, nor does pretending the issue does not exist (their current strategy) until advertisers are forced to threaten them The option available to them is clear, it's just not something anyone is willing to accept: connecting untru…

Post by throwawaymath » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 10:21 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #239

ben_w wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I am objectively wrong, I want my mind to be changed. I expect this to be the case for around 10% of my ‘knowledge’, even on topics I care to educate myself about, and much worse on other issues. Putting a link under the videos isn’t likely to achieve that, but that’s a separate issue. The only problem I have with Google doing this, is that I trust corporations and government about the same — i.e. that both will…

You're missing the point. Most things in life aren't settled as easily as the flat Earth debate. Google could also do this on something that's far more controversial (eg political) and justify it in the same manner. Imagine if Google were against climate change and every video about climate change gets a link to some website that says it's not true. That wouldn't be acceptable, would it? But being okay with Google do…

Post by busterarm » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 10:22 PM UTC

npunt wrote: post #240

xfitm3 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might be in the minority here but I enjoy the low quality youtube comments. Most people dismiss them as cancer but the reality is a lot of people think in patterns that drive these comments. I would rather be in touch with and exposed to this rather than try to pretend it doesn’t exist. It won’t ever go away, it will just be hidden.

I get where you're coming from with the academic curiosity of seeing how people think. That said, it seems you're assuming comments are simply a one-way output of different people's thought patterns, rather than a two-way process that has an effect on others. It's obvious it has a two-way effect - the point of reading and listening is to learn, and we can learn in ways that make us worse off. The idea that we should…

Post by _wmd » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 10:23 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #251

_wmd wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the structure of the service offering exceeds the limits of available technology, then the structure of the service is at fault and needs to change -- wishing away the bad people doesn't work, nor does pretending the issue does not exist (their current strategy) until advertisers are forced to threaten them The option available to them is clear, it's just not something anyone is willing to accept: connecting untru…

That's a funny thing to say. I take it that you are against freedom of expression and speech? Because both of those will (hopefully) never be censored in the way you desire. Remember, nothing in those comments was illegal or even broke the actual rules of basically any online service. > The option available to them is clear, it's just not something anyone is willing to accept: connecting untrustworthy anonymous third…

Post by npunt » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 10:24 PM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #252

npunt wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get where you're coming from with the academic curiosity of seeing how people think. That said, it seems you're assuming comments are simply a one-way output of different people's thought patterns, rather than a two-way process that has an effect on others. It's obvious it has a two-way effect - the point of reading and listening is to learn, and we can learn in ways that make us worse off. The idea that we should…

As a staunch supporter of free speech, being exposed to your internal thought process had some negative repercussions for me. None of my fellow pro-free-speech HN users were able to filter you, nor even were they able to socially pressure you, and as result I read an extremist opinion. I think it's important that communities control anti-free-speech comments, otherwise they will descend into extremism.