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

YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

news18.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 584 posts

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#241

Post by [deleted] »

johncena33 wrote: post #236
johnisgood wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These people (the genuine ones) lack context-awareness, so they could always find something racist, sexist, ableist, whateverist in anything you say. I just named something "blacklist" a couple of days ago. It has nothing to do with races, nor slavery. The only thing they have is a person in-between who connects the two because s/he is a troll, or because lacks context-awareness or whatever. I do not enable them.

> These people (the genuine ones) lack context-awareness No, they are very much aware of the context. Most of these people are just bullies, who have found a new way to mask their toxic behavior in the name of a good cause.

[deleted]

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#242

Post by Fogest »

curlypaul924 wrote: post #232
Fogest wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the problem. People will choose to ignore context and other grammatical history because of their own personal incorrect views. It's not like the word "black" is just used with blacklist. We also use it in other places like black market, black hat, and black site. None of these are related to black people, but instead all relate to a shady dark/scary side of things like you mentioned. When someone pictures a b…

Of those, I've heard of white hats, but I've not heard of white markets or white sites. If it had been black list and green list, I'm not sure anyone would have made a racial connection.

Yeah for sure. Like it's not racist that I like the white part of an Oreo cookie more than the black part. It just so happens that the cookie portions is called black and the filling colour is called white but other than that the colour is irrelevant.

I also have never heard of white markets, but I have heard and often use the word "grey market" to indicate an in between of legal and the illegal markets. This helps point to the fact that the word is not used in the racial sense, but instead the colour itself reflects a certain vibe. Grey is a bit brighter than black but not quite as bright as white. Thus the colour can indicate an in-between.

But like you mentioned "black market" and "grey market" probably won't be targeted by cancel culture since there is not an opposing white element.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#243

Post by curlypaul924 »

u801e wrote: post #111
js2 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Black list and its opposite, white list, associate black with bad and white with good. The usage of black in “black box” means opaque, not bad. So these aren’t the same. I had never thought about the connotations of blacklist and whitelist before it was pointed out to me. In retrospect, blacklist and whitelist are unnatural meanings of the words black and white, and blocklist and allowlist make much more sense. Conse…

> Black list and its opposite, white list, associate black with bad and white with good. > > The usage of black in “black box” means opaque, not bad. > So these aren’t the same. Why did this line of reasoning not apply to the name of the default branch in git? master in that case could easily mean master copy.

Yes, master could mean master copy, but that analogy falls apart quickly. Obviously it's not master/slave (I don't even know what a slave branch would mean). But that doesn't mean it's a good name. And not being a good name doesn't mean we should change it everywhere (because change has a cost that must be weighed).

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#245

Post by jimmytucson »

I didn’t know Agadmator was censored so I looked for information and found a video of him talking about it here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KSjrYWPxsG8

He doesn’t know why his podcast was flagged. He mentions a few possibilities-one of which is the black and white thing, which would be a mistake. It’s notable how guarded his speech is, as though he might say something else verboten.

I’ve watched hundreds of chess videos on YouTube and never heard of one getting flagged until now.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#246

Post by cout »

metiscus wrote: post #114
js2 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Black list and its opposite, white list, associate black with bad and white with good. The usage of black in “black box” means opaque, not bad. So these aren’t the same. I had never thought about the connotations of blacklist and whitelist before it was pointed out to me. In retrospect, blacklist and whitelist are unnatural meanings of the words black and white, and blocklist and allowlist make much more sense. Conse…

I haven't read heavily into this debate so this comes from a position of ignorance of the arguments. Feel free to link me to a reference if this has been analyzed along these lines already, I would like to learn. The convention seem to me to follow several similar motifs from the sciences. Black holes do not allow matter to escape and white holes are theoretical constructs that admit matter to the universe. The color…

Black holes are how I remember which one is which. But I would rather not have to think about it.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#247

Post by briandear »

Retric wrote: post #163
dehrmann wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Setting this case aside because it's sloppy reporting based on what another classifier found, this is a hard problem. Youtube gets too many videos and comments for humans to manually review them. Flagging helps, and Google likely uses ML more complex than just text and classifier (who is commenting, is the post trending, patterns in comments, etc.) When things do reach manual review, remember that humans make mistake…

Actually watching every YouTube video uploaded would take ~100,000 people which is possible, but quite expensive. Actually watching every video that’s flagged for banning might take ~100 people and seem like a reasonable effort. As such arguments about using automated systems are meaningless, they can pre-filter without having final decision making authority.

So why bother screening any of it? So what if some nefarious content makes it through. Don’t like it, don’t watch it. Not sure why everything has to be sanitized.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#248

Post by johncena33 »

sago wrote: post #131
ben509 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of language-fixing slacktivism easily becomes a trend because it's highly visible and requires no genuine effort. It's complete bullshit, though. This particular bullshit is awful since it trivializes all this historic pain to some inane game of word association. There's no point arguing, though, just drag your heels until they get bored and go off on some other crusade.

I'm disagreeing with this thread. So I guess prepping for the down votes. > it trivializes all this historic pain to some inane game of word association I think addressing one issue does not 'trivialise' everything else. It can be horribly overstated but changing small fry can help provide momentum to change something more significant. > It's complete bullshit, It is obviously associating racism with something not in…

> I think addressing one issue does not 'trivialise' everything else.

Yes, it does. On my Twitter I have "racism" and "race" including many other trendy SJW keywords blocked. The reason is I simply don't have the time and energy to tend to every single accusation of racism or whatever-isms is out there. And most these accusations have nothing to do with racism. It's just some bully has found a new target to harass.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#249

Post by serf »

awillen wrote: post #148
dehrmann wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Setting this case aside because it's sloppy reporting based on what another classifier found, this is a hard problem. Youtube gets too many videos and comments for humans to manually review them. Flagging helps, and Google likely uses ML more complex than just text and classifier (who is commenting, is the post trending, patterns in comments, etc.) When things do reach manual review, remember that humans make mistake…

People forget that they get these free services for free, and a big portion of that is because ML tools are able to cheaply do a really hard job of moderating. You hear about things like this because they're so unusual, which is a testament to the amount of time they work correctly without being noticed. Granted, there have been some issues with people getting banned from Google services for what appear to be wrong r…

> ...that is because ML tools are able to cheaply do a really hard job of moderating

I mean , YouTube is huge, but we had moderation-at-scale before ML was a popular phrase to bandy around.

'ML' and 'Algorithms' are just convenient non-human bogeyman that any corporation can pin all their woes on without batting an eye right now -- a convenient explanation tool for when things go wrong.

I am going to take a bold stance with this next statement:

An algorithm cannot be at fault -- it is always the fault of those that implement such algorithms.

YouTube and their community is huge -- YouTube has revenue fifteen times greater than Yahoo. 'Too big to X' should not be a tolerable excuse from any industry -- especially so since YouTube/Google has been pushing the idea for years that being a YTer is an actual profession.

Imagine for a moment coming into work and being told that you're fired because an internal corporate policy checker decided that something you did in your past work history was worth of termination; and then 24 hours later being told to continue coming into work because a mistake had been made, but with no further explanation.

This kind of 'workplace' would be intolerable in any real 'work environment'. Just more evidence that YTers are not really treated like any other partner or employee anywhere else in the world -- and that they should probably curtail that language if they want expectations to match the reality that their 'employees' experience.

>People forget that they get these free services for free,

YouTube is not a free service. This fallacy needs to go.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#250

Post by grawprog »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #172
grawprog wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I really have to wonder about specifically this instance of political correctness was, how many people were honestly and truly offended by the term 'blacklist' or 'whitelist' before some lignustics, sociology, whatever professer sat down and figured out it should be offensive and told people to be offended? I feel like this about many attempts to make language politically correct, but I really do wonder, was the…

> Like was there actually someone sitting there, using an app, seen the term blacklist and immediately started thinking it was an insult to them? My belief is absolutely not. It comes from an ideology that ascribes simple moralistic explanations to things. “This word has man in it so it must mean it excludes women”. “The word ‘master’ reminds people of slavery”, etc. Good luck speaking out “publicly” about it in the…

I don't want to go on too much, I know this topic can be rather divisive and people get sort of heated about it but I really think in many cases things like the black/white list changes are counterproductive.

There are actual race issues genuinely affecting people every day. Making a big deal out of what are essentially non-issues i'd be willing to bet 99% of people never think about or genuinely care about is just going to make the average person roll their eyes and not bother caring.

Which again, is counterproductive. If you want the average person to care about the actual systemic issues, violence and actual racial oppression, forcing them to adjust their language and take time to address issues like the gp's comment is not the way to do it.

Policing every word people say and making them feel guilty for using the wrong ones will not make them care, if anything it's going to make people who are otherwise neutral, who would maybe care, turn hostile.

It pushes people to extremes and leads to places like 8chan or Parler, where people take their language to utter extremes and the opposite extreme where people are finding offense in nearly every little thing.

Both are unreasonable.

Post reply on HN