YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#51

Post by ylere » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:22 PM UTC

qayxc wrote: post #32

Jan454 wrote: post #9

Maybe it's time for a public company-independent complains-platform where all companies are obliged by law to respond. Each complaint of course is hidden behind some anti-bot captcha/protection so that the companies themselve can't use AI to answer your complaints.

That's basically what the author suggests when they say: > Anyhow, I truly believe humanity has to rollback to operating at a human scale. It's impossible to operate a complaints-platform on a global scale if it's run by humans. According to GMI [0], 500 hours of content are uploaded every minute. Given an average video duration of about 12 minutes [1], that would be 2500 videos per hour. That's just too much to manu…

Is it though? Let's do a very rough estimate: 500 hours of content per minute in 2019, lets say 1 reviewer can review 3 hours of video each hour (by increasing play speed/skipping etc.) and we have a global workforce in lower income countries working 3x 8 hour shifts + weekends. That's 50060/33 = 30000 reviewers, at a monthly cost of $1000 that's 30000100012*7/5 = $504m/year. Youtube had $15b in revenues in 2019, so this represents around 3.5% of revenue. Now this is assuming that we actually need to 100% review every video before releasing it (which is not the case) and one reviewer can probably review more than 3 hours of content per hour with the right AI assistance so the real cost would be quite a bit lower. Even then, spending less than 5% of revenues on content review, moderation and support sounds very reasonable to me.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#52

Post by jrumbut » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:23 PM UTC

BrianOnHN wrote: post #49

m_a_g wrote: post #4

>Anyhow, I truly believe humanity has to rollback to operating at a human scale. >Using algorithms to flag content is totally fine… problem is when humans cannot interact with humans anymore and AI gets to chose what is right and wrong. Can't agree more.

This ignores human bad actors. There is no "rollback" for the existence of algorithms. Instead of whining (problems without solutions) spend some time contemplating what a sufficient algorithmic solution looks like. To be clear, that would be an algorithmic solution that "fights back" against issues like these (and not simply improving a failing solution). That may not be a competing product. Maybe it's an algorithmi…

The algorithm can exist, but to run it at scale requires buildings and large teams and bank accounts and therefore the companies that use these algorithms are susceptible to regulation.

Otherwise it seems like an enormous waste of talent and resources playing cat and mouse, when we can just give them guidelines and fairly often they'll be followed.

Of course bad actors can exist, but that's not a reason to give up on social solution to problems.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#53

Post by boomboomsubban » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:25 PM UTC

arsome wrote: post #48

boomboomsubban wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's still against US law to export pgp to certain countries, as it's considered munitions. Wild is a great description.

Didn't DJB v US pretty much end that? That would also impact things like Firefox for the record.

Pretty much, but export to "rogue states and terrorist organizations" is still technically illegal. I suspect it wouldn't withstand challenge though.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#54

Post by ttt0 » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:26 PM UTC

b3kart wrote: post #16

m_a_g wrote: post #4

>Anyhow, I truly believe humanity has to rollback to operating at a human scale. >Using algorithms to flag content is totally fine… problem is when humans cannot interact with humans anymore and AI gets to chose what is right and wrong. Can't agree more.

The thing is, we have to make sure we're OK with the consequences of going this way. Would people be happy to wait for days, maybe weeks, for their video to be approved for upload to YouTube? Would that work with the current society's attention span? Is YouTube as we know it actually feasible without AI-based moderation? Can it be a sustainable business with an army of human moderators and/or a drastically reduced sc…

> The thing is, we have to make sure we're OK with the consequences of going this way. Would people be happy to wait for days, maybe weeks, for their video to be approved for upload to YouTube?

Or they could just stop doing that and go back to how it used to be. Let people upload videos and review them only after it was flagged. Novel idea, I know.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#55

Post by dTal » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:28 PM UTC

qayxc wrote: post #32

Jan454 wrote: post #9

Maybe it's time for a public company-independent complains-platform where all companies are obliged by law to respond. Each complaint of course is hidden behind some anti-bot captcha/protection so that the companies themselve can't use AI to answer your complaints.

That's basically what the author suggests when they say: > Anyhow, I truly believe humanity has to rollback to operating at a human scale. It's impossible to operate a complaints-platform on a global scale if it's run by humans. According to GMI [0], 500 hours of content are uploaded every minute. Given an average video duration of about 12 minutes [1], that would be 2500 videos per hour. That's just too much to manu…

It takes a lot longer to make a video than to watch it. It therefore stands to reason that if humanity is capable of making all that content, humanity is capable of watching it - if it decided that were a priority.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#56

Post by ghaff » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:29 PM UTC

foepys wrote: post #22

adrianN wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who pays for the moderators? You still need a lot of manpower if you don't want algorithms, regardless of whether you have one Youtube or a thousand SpecialInterestTube.

Tech is very special in a way where they can get away with claiming that quite a lot is not possible at their scale. Imagine this for other industries. "We cannot do quality control before sending products out. We make too much stuff." "We don't check all tickets for the venue. Too many people." "Cleaning the entire building is not possible. It's too much space."

And those things are paid for. It would be perfectly reasonable if you had to pay per minute for uploading video and people had to pay for a subscription to watch it. That's just not what is expected for a mass platform today.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#57

Post by jodrellblank » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:31 PM UTC

HenryBemis wrote: post #21

> Anyhow, I truly believe humanity has to rollback to operating at a human scale. BYOReligion.. and Google believes that they need to increase 'engagement', increase profit, and decrease headcount.. so.. there you have it dear Sun Knudsen. Edit: I don't care for the 'virtual currency' of 'karma'. I wonder though; the sky is blue, I point at the sky, I say "the sky is blue", and people frown (?) upon me for stating th…

> "I say "the sky is blue", and people frown (?) upon me for stating the obvious fact of life.."

Yes; exactly this. If you were out in a crowd and called everyone's attention to you - thousands of people quietened to pay attention to what you were going to say for a moment, and you announced the thing you yourself say is an "obvious fact", that the sky is blue, the crowd would be annoyed at you for wasting their time with obvious low-quality trivia.

"company seeks profit" is the same low-value annoying thing to say. You're not being downvoted because it's untrue, you're being downvoted because it's like a toddler going "hey, hey, hey, hey, look, look at this, watch this" "okay?" "throws ball at ground". Great, thanks for that, good contribution.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#58

Post by tw04 » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:33 PM UTC

b3kart wrote: post #16

m_a_g wrote: post #4

>Anyhow, I truly believe humanity has to rollback to operating at a human scale. >Using algorithms to flag content is totally fine… problem is when humans cannot interact with humans anymore and AI gets to chose what is right and wrong. Can't agree more.

The thing is, we have to make sure we're OK with the consequences of going this way. Would people be happy to wait for days, maybe weeks, for their video to be approved for upload to YouTube? Would that work with the current society's attention span? Is YouTube as we know it actually feasible without AI-based moderation? Can it be a sustainable business with an army of human moderators and/or a drastically reduced sc…

>The thing is, we have to make sure we're OK with the consequences of going this way. Would people be happy to wait for days, maybe weeks, for their video to be approved for upload to YouTube? Would that work with the current society's attention span?

Why should they have to? Youtube makes BILLIONS of dollars, and they can afford to employs 10s of thousands of people to be human moderators, they just don't want to because that would eat into profits. If the video has X views or the publisher has X followers, it should be reviewed within hours by a real human.

>Is YouTube as we know it actually feasible without AI-based moderation? Can it be a sustainable business with an army of human moderators and/or a drastically reduced scale as a result?

Nobody is saying there should be 0 AI moderation, just that there should be a human that reviews a clip if AI flags it and the end-user clicks a button saying "this shouldn't have been flagged".

The entire premise of google is kind of broken and both technical and non-technical people feel that way from what I've heard. The fact it's nearly impossible to get to a real human on anything, and if you do happen to get to a real human, half the time they aren't even empowered to undo whatever decision their AI has made... it's just not a good way to do business. There's a balance to technology and human interaction and Google (again IMO) has gone too far in the technology direction. Heck, humanity as a whole might need to find someplace in the middle if the studies about the current generation of 20-somethings struggling with stunted social interactions due to social media is to be believed.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#59

Post by Andrew_nenakhov » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:34 PM UTC

Jukg7e3AFyskdj wrote: post #5

devoutsalsa wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain." - Harvey Dent in The Dark Knight It's funny that I really appreciated Google when I first signed up for Gmail. Now that I've had it for 16 years, I resent the fact that I can get deplatformed for any reason, and there's really nothing I can do to prevent that.

export all of your email to Protonmail and stop sucking on that Google breast

buy your own domain and only use the email addresses you fully control.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#60

Post by dgudkov » Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 12:34 PM UTC

Jan454 wrote: post #9

Maybe it's time for a public company-independent complains-platform where all companies are obliged by law to respond. Each complaint of course is hidden behind some anti-bot captcha/protection so that the companies themselve can't use AI to answer your complaints.

A small claims court for the internet. I like that.