191–200 of 305 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would literally beat the current situation by a country mile. The goal isn't to perfect the YouTube flagging algo, after all ... an adversarial algo is a small price to pay.
>That would literally beat the current situation by a country mile. I don't think google agrees.
>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…
Well presumably Google being one of the worlds wealthiest corporations could hire and pay people a living wage to match the demand of users looking to upload videos to YouTube. It is in YouTube’s interest as it only exists and makes money on this very user generated content.
Yeah it’s great YouTube exists and can market to content creators about its market capture audience, but maybe it would be a better system without the middleman as anyone can upload a video anywhere on the internet making it instantly viewable by billions
>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.
https://archive.org/details/bestofcreativeco00ahld/page/133/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where are people escaping to? Are people publishing their own content on Gopher or BitTorrent nowadays? These platforms have a perfect balance of usability and freedom. They can take over the world.
It seems like they are making their own sites. Nebula is one such place where a few of the higher quality content creators are going. I've no idea if it'll work, but they are trying. https://watchnebula.com/
>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…
If we made the case for operating "at human scale" Youtube would be amongst first casualties.
to your last point :
> Anyone can upload a video and make it viewable by billions, instantly. I think we shouldn't forget how amazing this actually is.
By the same reasoning, COVID-19 is similarly amazing.
Opinions move on : Youtube is 15 years old now. It's a practical monopoly, being the worlds 2nd most visited website. I wont deny it's utility - but it's a gross centralisation who's modus operandi present significant questions - chiefly, Is it right that it has for years circumvented nearly all regulation applied to other media, and should it remains largely unaccountable to any elected power ?
So the challenge it seems is thus : how do preserve the good things that self published video content has done for us, but prevent or limit the consequences and attendant injustice caused by a service so infeasibly large. it's impossible to administer ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's an outdated view. Youtube now bends to activists and political winds.
So what is the activist political position on WPA2 vulnerabilities? You see what you want to see, but YouTube hosts an overwhelming abundance of evidence that contradicts your claim.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a "psyops", YouTube, like every gigantic corporation is motivated entirely by money, and they would be happy to monetize every video on the site if they could, but advertisers pay the bills, and since advertisers are sensitive to their public image, YouTube goes out of their way to appease them. The problem here is the ad model, not AI or YouTube's values.
That's an outdated view. Youtube now bends to activists and political winds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where are people escaping to? Are people publishing their own content on Gopher or BitTorrent nowadays? These platforms have a perfect balance of usability and freedom. They can take over the world.
It seems like they are making their own sites. Nebula is one such place where a few of the higher quality content creators are going. I've no idea if it'll work, but they are trying. https://watchnebula.com/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I don't have any data to back this up, but i believe of those 2500 videos per minute, 2450 or so the AI could classify them as safe, not requiring human interaction. The other 50 are classified on a scale from 0 to 100 on a badness scale. The ones closer to "not that bad" (ToS and such) gets put through automatically waiting for a review. The illegal content (rape, gore, child porn) and such gets blocked automaticall…
Was good for spam for a long time.
YouTube's content policy is bizare. Children in my family seem to watch videos of Spiderman dry humping Elsa or grannies kicking people in the nuts, but then they remove stuff like this. I guess this is what happens when advertisers are the main priority and the moderators have all been replaced with robots. Content that may actually harm the development of children is considered fine, while someone posting a slightl…
Knowing that that's what the kids are watching, why are you still allowing them to have access to YouTube?