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

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

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 305 posts

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

#101

Post by feanaro »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #78
ttt0 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

The media companies made sure that’ll never happen again :/ That’s how we got ContentID: to prevent music and video piracy.

Why is it a foregone conclusion that we cannot unmake this?

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

#102

Post by jscipione »

thu2111 wrote: post #85
kodablah wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument is framed as wanting a human during take down dispute, not pre-approval. There's no need to treat this as an absolute. Why are human contact and reasonable expediency considered mutually exclusive? There is a lot of room in the middle. Can allow human dispute resolution for non-free accounts (i.e. paid or earning). Can limit upload frequency site wide while dispute/abuse queues are backed up (kno…

What's with the assumption here that there aren't humans involved in this decision? The linked post literally quotes Google saying: "Hi Sun Knudsen, Our team has reviewed your content, and, unfortunately, we think it violates our harmful and dangerous policy." Google has always had humans in the loop. Not for every decision but certainly the more impactful ones that affect user generated content. When I worked there,…

Louis Rossman had his YouTube account temporarily suspended for posting a video entitled “An angry clinton” which was a video of his pet cat Clinton meowing. Human moderation is needed in cases like this. There is obviously no analysis of the video content, the algorithm looks for keywords in the video title. The keywords used by the algorithm are centered around protecting Democratic politicians from criticism. There is no advanced AI going on, the algorithm is simple pattern matching.

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

#103

Post by water8 »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #33
b3kart wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I’d be shocked if the best and the brightest that Alphabet can buy can’t figure out a reputation system, manually-reviewed with AI assistance, or some other way to approve content in a convenient manner. Don’t forget also that Alphabet is swimming in money. They can certainly afford the manpower to make it relatively seamless for the user. And I really doubt users can’t be trained to associate a few hours’ wait of a…

How about you don't believe everything you read on the internet. Even 5 star people are wrong too.

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

#104

Post by MonsterBurger »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #33
b3kart wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I’d be shocked if the best and the brightest that Alphabet can buy can’t figure out a reputation system, manually-reviewed with AI assistance, or some other way to approve content in a convenient manner. Don’t forget also that Alphabet is swimming in money. They can certainly afford the manpower to make it relatively seamless for the user. And I really doubt users can’t be trained to associate a few hours’ wait of a…

this! they could have a page entirely of "reported videos" by person or AI and the severity would rank how high on this page the content is.

Things like timestamp of when in the video was reported might help for scanning "content" e.g. "50 people reported this 20 minute video in the 3-5 minute mark" or similar average.

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

#105

Post by water8 »

indigochill wrote: post #86
gumby wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> >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. Simply replaced a prior system in which humans cannot interact with humans anymore and certain humans get to chose what is right and wrong. The key problem is the inability to provide human feedback more than the mechanism for making the init…

Federation is the answer at scale. You need dictatorship for effective moderation. But you also want those dictatorships small, uniform, and interchangeable so that the "citizens" of those dictatorships can easily pick the one that suits them best. Those dictatorships link up (federate) with like-minded dictatorships to benefit from network effects of sharing their content among themselves. If your content doesn't su…

Or you could just be mature and not need to suck on the teat of authoritarianism and learn to tolerate offensiveness.

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

#106

Post by rapnie »

izacus wrote: post #17
b3kart wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

What if... instead of YouTube you'd have several intereset based sites which could actually handle their moderation and workload instead of being a giant uncaring behemoth?

You mean, like the open standards-based Fediverse, where there are also no ads and algoritmic feeds optimizing for engagement?

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

#107

Post by tclancy »

adrianN wrote: post #20
izacus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if... instead of YouTube you'd have several intereset based sites which could actually handle their moderation and workload instead of being a giant uncaring behemoth?

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.

Without disagreeing with your point, I do think there's something to be said for the more specialized sites the Internet used to specialize in. Places that foster a sense of community tend to wind up with users who are happy to pitch in when something doesn't look right (or get overrun by spammers if the community isn't able to deal with the issues). I am happy to pull weeds in a community garden in a way I will not at some factory farm. This approach isn't a utopia; people are people and everything is political, but at smaller scales, saying "Well, just start your own [niche] video site" isn't snark, it's a realistic thing and perhaps both sites contribute to the marketplace of ideas. YouTube is the marketplace of the unthinking.

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

#108

Post by judge2020 »

atat7024 wrote: post #91
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.

Hackaday.com does just fine. YouTube was fine before Google. Stop centralising.

YouTube was bought in 2006 - not much time to even think about having a content problem or adpocalypse.

0: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna15196982

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

#110

Post by at_a_remove »

I think the "oh no human moderation would cost us too much" defense is a distraction. It's a good one, because it is working, but it is still a distraction.

Let us suppose we have a program which checks for orthodoxy according to the YouTube Terms of Service against each video submitted.

Nothing but a lack of having done the work prevents YouTube from adding to its "rejected" flag the following:

1) A list of timestarts and durations of the portions of the video violating the ToS. 2) For each item in that list, make it a tuple and add a reason -- which clause was violated?

Then outputting that to the owner of the rejected video.

Nothing stops them from doing this. Some set of words or images happened somewhere in the timestream -- the orthodoxy program has that timestamp as it churns through the video. And a specific clause was violated -- a particular word in a wordlist as an example, because there's no simple, non-composite function that just says "good or not good."

This is really not a particularly high bar as an ask.

Post reply on HN