Live data from Hacker News

A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

wired.com

421–430 of 461 posts

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, just for the record, I'm dismissing it too - "systemic" racism is completely imaginary.

Why do you say that?

Well, for one, it's not actually defined - and this is deliberate, because if one were try to define it in any meaningful way it could immediately be proven to be incorrect. For the most part, its proponents point to (somewhat arbitrary) statistics, but ignore counter-statistics (like incarceration rates of men vs. women, for example) that undermine their position.

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What connotation does green have? Where can I find the land of green people?

Greenhorns are the new and inexperienced. See also: green usernames here on HN. Note: I'm serious and not serious at all here at the same time. No: the colors doesn't matter at all. Yes: If someone wants to get offended they will find a way, even how they are held outside since no one makes jokes about them.

Exactly this. I am tired with fake official correctness, and that people get back to racist/homophobic when they are off.

I am French and we have a history (and culture) of parody, and freedom of doing it and being offended by it. This was the case when I was a kid and up until some 1( years ago.

Now criticizing or making fun of some groups is *dangerous* - you cannot publish a picture of the god of Islam without literally putting your life in danger. Yes, I know that this is a small minority yada yada yada, but I have only one head.

At the same time you can make fun of Catholics. They are not happy, but also somehow "protected" by the culture and history of France. This is similar to Jews, though they became more offendable recently.

The worst is that the people who are going to officially claim how much everyone is equal will say in private that someone is a "tapette" (I do not know the English word for that: derogatory expression for gay), or that Muslims are middle ages savages, or that Blacks are dumb (we had a few cases on TV where the invited person thought that they were off when they were not).

I do not know what the solution is - it certainly does not help the normal part of the communities above that people are afraid to put them in the same bag as Catholics (in France). They would not be officially immune of criticism/fun, but they would be perceived as "people like us".

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#423
post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Totalitalgorithms" (Totalgorithms?) captures the spirit of these algorithms. They seem like bugs but they're actually undirected, organic features of a total technocratic political system that is rapidly coming to dominate life in our modern societies. The filters will be tuned but not fixed because they aren't broken. They're part of what Tocqueville described as 'soft despotism': "Thus, After having thus successiv…

Algorithmic totalitarianism resonates strongly. It's not a human rights violation if it isn't a human doing it!

The human's rights were still violated even if it was a machine that did it.

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#424
post #21

We need a word or phrase for this phenomenon, where we attempt to substitute human pattern recognition with algorithms that just aren't up to the job. Facebook moderation, Tesla Full Self Driving, the War Games movie, arrests for mistaken facial identification. It's becoming an increasingly dystopic force in our lives and will likely get much worse before getting even worse. So it needs a label. Maybe there's a ten s…

The word is “False Positive”

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#425
post #420
post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neglibot is nice. Dumbot works too...

I love Dumbot. Has a beautiful ring to it. Can definitely see it catching on

Dumbot works with the Carlin rule of improving the word by putting fucking in the middle: dumfuckingbot

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#426

Maybe they should stop deciding what people can and can't say. That would solve the problem, wouldn't it.

The problem is that many advertisers don't want their ads appearing next to "unsavory" content. So if they don't do a "good enough" job flagging inappropriate videos less ads will be bought.

It isn't really a choice that YouTube is making. It is them attempting to remain appealing to advertisers.

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#427

We demand censorship. We refuse to pay for it. We cry when it's done on the cheap. And it's all their fault!

More like:

- The media thinks that people will read an article about "inappropriate" content on YouTube.

- YouTube gets embarrassed and tries to remove inappropriate content.

- The media thinks that people will read an article about "appropriate" content being flagged on YouTube.

I feel like YouTube just made the mistake of jumping onto this never-ending treadmill of trying to please the media.

Of course that isn't the entire problem. They do "need" to remain attractive to advertisers. So demonetization (or at least some "safe for all advertisers flag") needs to exist so that conservative advertisers keep finding the platform attractive. (However I feel the response could have been much finer grained. For example allow advertisers to opt-into different categories of "inappropriate" content. For example some brands have not problems being next to violent content. This way you would still make less money from an "inappropriate" video but you would at least take home something.).

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#428
post #256
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean i think Google has both money and brains

Apparently not.

You are assuming that this "problem" is costing them more than hiring some humans. This article sounds more to me like the media making some sensational story. It seems unlikely that there is significant impact to YouTube from this event.

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm? I don't think an algorithm has to give "correct" answers, it just has to be precisely defined. For example, one could say "For this problem, a greedy algorithm yields decent but suboptimal answers." Merriam-Webster online says: "a procedure for solving a mathematical problem (as of finding the greatest common divisor) in a finite number of steps that frequently involves repetition of an operation" and "broadly :…

Algorithms solve problems. Wrong answers are not solutions to (i.e. do not solve) a given problem. Hence, algorithm implies that it provides correct answers within the parameters of the problem.

> Hence, algorithm implies that it provides correct answers within the parameters of the problem.

And so they always do. The problem that an algorithm solves is defined by the algorithm itself. The purpose of a system is what it does[0].

Algorithms are useful to solve problems for us - the trick is always in making sure that the problem the algorithm solves is the one we want.

--

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...

Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech

#430
post #21

We need a word or phrase for this phenomenon, where we attempt to substitute human pattern recognition with algorithms that just aren't up to the job. Facebook moderation, Tesla Full Self Driving, the War Games movie, arrests for mistaken facial identification. It's becoming an increasingly dystopic force in our lives and will likely get much worse before getting even worse. So it needs a label. Maybe there's a ten s…

AI: Artificial Ignorance
Post reply on HN