Live data from Hacker News

YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

news18.com

321–330 of 584 posts

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

#321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not entirely true. First the platform is free, but also is the content that people provide and without it Youtube wouldn't make sense - so it's not a free service, it's a partnership. Second, for many people YouTube is the primary source of income, and I'm sure there would be plenty of content authors who'd be glad to pay a service with human moderators rather than bots - GIVEN THAT they get to keep access to the sam…

You just described a monopoly

What does youtube do that is monopolistic? Just because all users congregate onto one site doesn't mean that Youtube needs to be broken apart.

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

#322
post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely there's some space between "Recommend" and "Ban"?

Everytime this is coming up, I wonder why people were always okay with banning nudity but now that hate speech (that undeniably agitates people and leads to hate crime) gets banned, they oppose content blocking.

Who was okay with banning nudity?

I think the only thing I've seen universally agreed upon to be bad is child pornography.

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

#323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just described a monopoly

What does youtube do that is monopolistic? Just because all users congregate onto one site doesn't mean that Youtube needs to be broken apart.

I don't think Youtube necessarily needs to be broken apart, but they are a natural monopoly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly

The cost to a competitor is in getting a user to switch. Think of it in terms of paying users: how much would you have to pay someone to switch from Youtube to your site? Multiply the average by the number of users, and that's the advantage Youtube has over competitors.

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

#324

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…

> You hear about things like this because they're so unusual

I feel like it's the exact opposite: we're hearing about them because these are the ones that slipped into public awareness. The inadequacy of automated moderation without any real semblance of human oversight has been rampant and frequent for about as long as the concept has existed.

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

#325
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article does contain very little information. But this channel is one I watch a lot of. It is dedicated to in depth chess commentary with some bits of chess history and I highly recommend it if you play. This it not the first time this has happened to Antonio. He even discussed it a bit the first time, 7 months ago. In that instance it was a single video that was removed. In that video he says “white will always…

> this is not the first time This article is actually about that time seven months ago. Quite why it’s been written today is unclear.

SEO...

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

#326
post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m really curious to why you feel this way? You actually answered this question yourself with your next paragraph :). Currently being racist towards white males gives businesses, influencers, and politicians more power. And I fundamentally disagree with this notion. I do not think shitting on particular groups of people should make someone excel. I think it should show what kind of negative person they are and the…

Definitely agree with the us vs. them mentality that is often perpetuated in the media. Most people are practically not far apart, but people also don't want to confront the past and an us vs. them dichotomy is a lot more accessible. FWIW I just see shitting on white men as some kind of catharsis for women and people of color. There is a lot more deep pain that needs to be expressed before any real racial healing. Ir…

My main issue is more based on how unproductive it is. The media and social media I believe is tearing apart countries and creating huge divide that continues to grow and grow. I find it disturbing that these companies profit off of creating this divide and continuing to spew anti male and anti white sentiment.

> FWIW I just see shitting on white men as some kind of catharsis for women and people of color.

What's funny is that half the time I hear it, it's a white male shitting on white males. I'll hear a white male podcast host complaining about white males. I often feel like it's less about people doing it to feel better about themselves, it seems more like they are doing it to "look good". Kinda like giving themselves a pat on the back for saying a "woke" line. Or I'll see people like A-list actors shitting on white males despite them being an incredibly privileged individual.

And now we even see females being given political position because of their gender and not necessarily their merit. Our Prime Minister in Canada when he got elected made the cabinet 50/50 male-female. The problem I'm starting to see with this kind of stereotyping is that it is starting to put gender over things like ability.

When a politicians first sentence about why they put someone in a position is "because they were x gender or y race" rather than "Because they had xyz skills and were the most qualified" it points to a problem in my books. In my area we had fire departments that had lower requirements for females than males. However the requirements indicate they are what a firefighter requires to be able to successfully meet the standards of the job and keep themselves, their coworkers, and the public safe. So it seems silly when the that "minimum" to get the job done suddenly gets lowered for a group. It's the same job, but one group doesn't have to meet the same standard? Luckily now I have seen these requirements have shifted to use new testing methodologies that better tests candidates against job requirements and is equal for all genders and ages. I got on a bit of a tangent with this, but my overall point is that because of these norms being pushed by the media often-times the politics and PR becomes more important than having the skills required. This is just one side-effect of many that is caused by this kind of weird PC culture that has been going on.

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

#327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does youtube do that is monopolistic? Just because all users congregate onto one site doesn't mean that Youtube needs to be broken apart.

I don't think Youtube necessarily needs to be broken apart, but they are a natural monopoly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly The cost to a competitor is in getting a user to switch. Think of it in terms of paying users: how much would you have to pay someone to switch from Youtube to your site? Multiply the average by the number of users, and that's the advantage Youtube has over competitors.

YouTube doesn't really fit the definition of a natural monopoly, particularly because there's nothing fundamentally stopping other services from popping up. YouTube's status as an effective monopoly doesn't come from some sort of scarcity of the means of production.

> The cost to a competitor is in getting a user to switch.

Only if we're assuming that users and uploaders will only ever use exactly one service at any given time. No reason why that needs to be the case; nothing stopping people from uploading to YouTube and Vimeo and Twitch and DailyMotion and PornHub and LBRY and PeerTube and whatever other platforms, and nothing stopping people from viewing from those platforms, either.

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

#328
post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care if what you watch is good or bad for you . I care if what you watch turns you into a threat to me . Based on the past few years, it looks like maybe 20% of the general population is suggestible enough to endanger the rest of us.

The problem is that the other guy is saying the same thing you are. The radical left and the radical right both think each other's points are dangerous. And the moderates are pointing at both sides and claiming the same thing. From their respective viewpoints, they're in the "right", just as you think you are. There's a slippery slope here, and I feel it's one so large that we can't even tell we're already sliding on…

  The problem is that the other guy is saying the same thing you are. 
Then I hope I win. Cause the other guy really likes firearms and believes Bill Gates is some sort of satanic reptilian timelord.

   Facebook's new governing body are interesting, but I fear will be troublesome in other ways. 
I don't see that model making anyone happy because I believe true impartiality is impossible. The honest and less bureaucratic approach for FB to take is to admit the process is subjective.

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

#329
post #154
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> It is obviously associating racism with something not intentionally racist. But does it not strike to you at all problematic, at the moment, that 'black' is a synonym of 'bad' and 'white' of 'good'? Does it not occur to you that it might improve our language to change that? Honestly, lately I feel like the opposite is the case. Everywhere I go anywhere online all I see is white people being shit on. I see incredibl…

> Honestly, lately I feel like the opposite is the case. Everywhere I go anywhere online all I see is white people being shit on. I see incredibly racist things being said about white people everywhere online and there are zero consequences for it. In fact they often get praised for it. So no, I think what you're saying is far from being true.

It's not just whites but east asians, jews as well. The whole idea derives from the notion that its okay to be racist if its upwards. People associate those groups as being affluent and automatically people think its okay to "punch up".

There are certain groups that we are not supposed to "punch down". There is a rise in anti-semitism, anti-asian, anti-white imho because wealth gap is increasing and people who are on the bottom tend to be not of those groups so they feel its justified and its okay to be racist not even being conscious of their actions and thoughts.

Like many Koreans during the LA riots knew exactly who were looting their stores but its forbidden and "racist" just like the victims of a subset of BLM rioters who decided to loot businesses that can't mention the demographic despite video footage evidence, anecdotes and that overwhelming group behind the protests.

It's getting ridiculous like when I was playing Battlefield and was permanently banned for saying "niggardly use of ammo packs" as the person was not cooperating and refusing to drop ammos.

The whole thing about master branch, master bedroom also has turned North America into a laughing stock. I can't wait to leave this puritannical shithole.

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

#330
post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People often watch YouTube videos at 2x speeds, it’s part of their app to select 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2x because you can generally listen to most speakers at that speed just fine. Let alone 11 hours of ocean waves etc. Only averaging 1.3x assumed significant overhead and going back to re listen to segments, have an escalation queue for flagged videos, and randomly assigning multiple people to the same videos to ensure pe…

[disclaimer] I work at Google, all opinions are my own. I don't deal with Youtube but have had exposure to moderation operations. It is not an easy task. Google already has more than 10k people working on this: https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/expanding-our-work-agai... . If 100 people solved the issue, it would have been solved. You are incorrect about your assumptions in many respects. Let me list out a few: 1)…

Perhaps that's because not everyone believes planet scale moderstion is a task any one entity should be tasked with?
Post reply on HN