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

221–230 of 305 posts

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

#221

Post by Minor49er »

hansel_der wrote: post #200
Minor49er wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing that that's what the kids are watching, why are you still allowing them to have access to YouTube?

i kind of get where you are coming from but denying access to knowledge/reality is not helpful.

What knowledge/reality is gained from videos of Spiderman dry humping Elsa or grannies kicking people in the nuts? This is the typical kinds of content that YouTube has lined up for children. Do you really expect a cesspool like this to harbor anything of quality or value for developing minds?

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

#222

Post by thu2111 »

devmor wrote: post #95
thu2111 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

"Our team" is quite often a lie. Why do you assume that a human was involved? Especially when it comes to Google, who notoriously skimps on human support staff.

Because I worked there and back then, when Google claimed content had been manually reviewed, it had been. It might have been by a low wage worker in India or Brazil and they might have spent 20 seconds on it, but there was a person in the loop.

That's why I turned this around. Why do you assume they're lying, without evidence?

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

#223

Post by thu2111 »

kodablah wrote: post #137
thu2111 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

> What's with the assumption here that there aren't humans involved in this decision? The linked post literally quotes Google saying [...] The post literally quotes Google as saying that for the _last_ time this happened. Then the post literally states they appealed and never heard back. There is nothing concerning a human for this instance, though I suspect once the uploader reaches out (were it not for the populari…

Appealing and not hearing back doesn't mean the original decision was entirely automated, it means they ignore appeals. Plenty of people would love nothing more than to argue with Google employees all day about every decision the firm makes - just think about webmasters and SEO alone - so the fact that YouTube actually has such a process is already kind of remarkable.

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

#224

Post by yarcob »

hansel_der wrote: post #200
Minor49er wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing that that's what the kids are watching, why are you still allowing them to have access to YouTube?

i kind of get where you are coming from but denying access to knowledge/reality is not helpful.

our kids are not allowed to watch youtube on their own because youtubes algorithms surface the worst of the worst

Youtube is not something kids can use without supervision.

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

#225

Post by tomschlick »

root_axis wrote: post #174
seriousquestion wrote: post #172

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.

> So what is the activist political position on WPA2 vulnerabilities?

Well we did just have a case with Twitter and IIRC Youtube where they redefined their "hacked material" policies to bend to the political will after the whole Hunter Biden laptop fiasco. So this may just be collateral damage due to those policy changes and the AI behind enforcing them.

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

#226

Post by hervature »

thu2111 wrote: post #222
devmor wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Our team" is quite often a lie. Why do you assume that a human was involved? Especially when it comes to Google, who notoriously skimps on human support staff.

Because I worked there and back then, when Google claimed content had been manually reviewed, it had been. It might have been by a low wage worker in India or Brazil and they might have spent 20 seconds on it, but there was a person in the loop. That's why I turned this around. Why do you assume they're lying, without evidence?

Choosing to die on that hill of technicality seems like a silly choice. People say "human" but they really mean "a person who diligently considered the content, probably watched the video more than once, understood what they were watching, and possibly has a chance to debate with another human". Or, you know, a reasonable definition for "human in the loop".

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

#227

Post by SirSourdough »

thu2111 wrote: post #222
devmor wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Our team" is quite often a lie. Why do you assume that a human was involved? Especially when it comes to Google, who notoriously skimps on human support staff.

Because I worked there and back then, when Google claimed content had been manually reviewed, it had been. It might have been by a low wage worker in India or Brazil and they might have spent 20 seconds on it, but there was a person in the loop. That's why I turned this around. Why do you assume they're lying, without evidence?

Why wouldn't we assume they are lying? Interacting with their dispute process doesn't have any human qualities, so what would make us think that humans are involved?

They are a massive monopoly and just the other day it was reported that they manipulated their own ad markets for their own profit. They constantly inaccurately accuse people of malicious intent and copyright infringement, often massively hindering peoples' careers and generally providing zero recourse. To not assume lying and at best self-serving intent given Alphabet/Google's position in the world would be foolish.

On top of that, is it really that different to use inaccurate AI or to use humans who are intentionally not given the time or tools to do human-quality work?

The problem is obviously with the overall quality of moderation, and the level of power exerted by platforms over users. Whether a non-skilled human reviewer or an AI is handling the broken process hardly matters given the results.

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

#228

Post by admax88q »

hervature wrote: post #226
thu2111 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I worked there and back then, when Google claimed content had been manually reviewed, it had been. It might have been by a low wage worker in India or Brazil and they might have spent 20 seconds on it, but there was a person in the loop. That's why I turned this around. Why do you assume they're lying, without evidence?

Choosing to die on that hill of technicality seems like a silly choice. People say "human" but they really mean "a person who diligently considered the content, probably watched the video more than once, understood what they were watching, and possibly has a chance to debate with another human". Or, you know, a reasonable definition for "human in the loop".

It seems you're defining "human in the loop" as "Google makes what I consider to be the correct decision in this case." I believe the point that thu2111 is trying to make is that there _are_ humans in the loop, and having them is no insurance against unilateral decisions that you disagree with or even just plain stupid decisions.

The point is that involving more humans in the moderation decisions at YouTube does not guarantee nor is there any evidence to suggest, that it would result in better moderation.

Somebody with the technical and industry knowledge to know that talking about security vulnerabilities like this shouldn't be removed can probably find a better job that YouTube video moderation.

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

#229

Post by IronWolve »

root_axis wrote: post #167
arminiusreturns wrote: post #120

Stop buying into the "the AI did it" whitewashing. Youtube is selectively targeting more and more channels and videos for daring to be any sort of contrarian. Its psyops under any other name.

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.

>hey 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

Thats the excuse, but in reality, google still runs ads on demonetized channels. And there are companies that want to advertise on these other channels. Google is actually doing a disservice to stock holders by excluding profits, but many suspect that they want to be a cable network in the long run, siding with media corps.

There are tiers of advertisers, lower tier companies will gladly pay to advertise on lower quality channels.

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

#230

Post by tacosaretasty »

The hypocrisy from Google here is palpable. First this content creator got a strike for showing users how GPG works and now for linking to academic research. On the other hand you have Google project zero who openly publish vulnerability research to the detriment of some software vendors.

You can’t have it both ways and as someone who works in this space I’m pretty upset by this ham fisted approach to censoring content.

I look forward to google becoming the next AOL.

Post reply on HN