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

YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 609 posts

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#291

Post by t_mann »

jeffbee wrote: post #134
Gigachad wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just the other day youtube suggested me this cutsie "what to do with old microwaves" video that just had the corporate jingle music over a video of a guy building various things out of microwave transformers without any kind of narration or warning of the danger. Considering people are actually dying trying these microwave tricks, this is no longer a theoretical concern. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2UfglFeOH8 (m…

Salad is pretty dangerous and I don't see anyone putting disclaimers on cooking shows.

Care to elaborate? I've been eating salad my whole life and I'm just fine. But then again, I also cook eggs with runny yolk, so I guess I'm just a renegade in the eyes of the food safety folks.

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#292

Post by enos_feedler »

pornel wrote: post #10

There is a massive YouTube and Instagram industry of outright faking craft and cooking tips. They're not just bad or a stretch, they're intentionally fabricated, made at scale by TheSoul Publishing with 550 employees. That's because making cool things looking surprisingly easy goes viral way better than actual reality-grounded instructions, and for the adtech giants nothing matters except the number of clicks. Before…

"That's because making cool things looking surprisingly easy goes viral way better than actual reality-grounded instructions" <- I feel like this might be the soul of the whole "no code" movement and why it bugs me a bit.

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#293

Post by ericbarrett »

AlphaOne1 wrote: post #179
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need things to change here. We need Google to moderate their services properly, Human moderation isn’t perfectly consistent, either. It would be extraordinarily expensive to expect YouTube to have humans moderate everything manually. What are people willing to give up in exchange for a human-moderated version of YouTube? Would we be okay if they charged a $3 “moderation fee” on every upload to cover the cost of…

Moderation is very complicated especially since it can be subjective based on the background and skill level of who is watching the video. Would it be possible to crowd source this? For example, I could add a filter to my search saying exclude 'profanity' and videos with profanity would be removed. Or exclude videos that are 'dangerous' or 'for entertainment only' and those would be removed. My thought is that we sho…

Anything "crowdsourced" can and will be gamed by spammers. Such tags would become useless very quickly without traditional moderation.

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#294

Post by pessimizer »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #48
CM30 wrote: post #32

YouTube's moderation is ridiculous, and it demonstrates the problem Google has in general. They don't like paying actual people to moderate their sites, and rely on automated systems and bots to do everything for them. So, if there's ever an issue (or you have a bunch of scammers mass reporting you because you debunk their 'work'), then YouTube/Google seems to think you're the problem instead of the scumbags. We need…

> We need things to change here. We need Google to moderate their services properly, Human moderation isn’t perfectly consistent, either. It would be extraordinarily expensive to expect YouTube to have humans moderate everything manually. What are people willing to give up in exchange for a human-moderated version of YouTube? Would we be okay if they charged a $3 “moderation fee” on every upload to cover the cost of…

> I don’t see demands for perfect human moderation of YouTube uploads as realistic in any way.

Then don't add the word "perfect."

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#295

Post by queuebert »

vibrolax wrote: post #196
sebastianconcpt wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait until youtube recommends you to click on "How to start a fission reactor in your garage".

The first man-made fission reactor was built in a squash court.

By actual physicists.

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#296

Post by jermaustin1 »

hef19898 wrote: post #80
logifail wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not just fabricated for the views, but reactions too I regard videos which include the word "reacts" in the title as having a huge red flag. The signal-to-noise on this junk content is simply appalling.

The one reason I still have Youtube, after getting rid of everything else Google, is the effort I out over time into getting rid of a whole bunch crappy content proposals on my attached account. Every once in a while I have to block some channels, overall it is acceptable. Once in a while I end up on Youtube without being logged in, man is it a mess. As bad as the proposals on Internet Explorers starting page I see a…

My wife thinks it is weird that I watch so much YouTube, because when she goes to YouTube (not signed in), she is inundated with so many spammy/scammy videos. I told her it has taken me almost 15 years to curate the feed I have. And some days I have no new videos I want to watch, so I rewatch old ones.

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#297

Post by whywhywhywhy »

blocked_again wrote: post #38

I think YouTube/Google has a big leadership crisis at the moment. Removing the dislike counter was the obvious sign.

With a dislike counter at least that could signal something is amiss with these videos, but now you just see thumbs up everythings cool guys and the comments can be moderated by the uploader to remove anything negative.

Still don't understand why they removed it.

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#298

Post by fho »

Beltalowda wrote: post #106
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need things to change here. We need Google to moderate their services properly, Human moderation isn’t perfectly consistent, either. It would be extraordinarily expensive to expect YouTube to have humans moderate everything manually. What are people willing to give up in exchange for a human-moderated version of YouTube? Would we be okay if they charged a $3 “moderation fee” on every upload to cover the cost of…

No one expects things to be perfect or that there will be no mistakes, but there's a whole lot of space between "perfect" and "braindead stupid". The worst part isn't so much that mistakes get made, but the way those mistakes are dealt with, which is often a frustrating and silly experience.

Could this be a browser plugin? No idea how "invasive" a plugin can be, but ad-blockers and privacy plugins seem to be able to change a lot on webpages (including blocking ad videos on Youtube).

So theoretically it seems possible to build a plugin that moderates comments on web pages ... "No one expects things to be perfect" ... so it does not hurt to try?

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#299

Post by dpratt »

raldi wrote: post #109
throwaway9870 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It probably should have been more than 3 hours given that you likely mean "voltage" not "amps". Before everyone jumps on me, "it is the amps that kill you, not voltage", I understand electricity quite well and in this context, saying something like "handling high amps in a university" is almost certainly not what was taught.

Rather than admonishing everyone for wondering the obvious question, why not just explain your reasoning?

An analogy: while technically what kills you due to a fall is called “gravity”, that’s not the whole picture. In actuality, it’s the height you fall from, which allows gravity to build up enough velocity to kill you when the fall ends.

Despite the fact that you’re experiencing the same gravitational acceleration from both, a one meter fall, while being potentially dangerous if you’re not prepared and allowed to land right, is not likely to kill you. A 100 meter fall, on the other hand, is likely not survivable by any means.

Re: YouTube removes criticism of dangerous fractal wood burning, but leaves up tips

#300

Post by xanaxagoras »

cupofpython wrote: post #265
c22 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only monetarily cheap because it's been built, like most modern things, with a massive externalization of its waste-cost.

Same for toilet paper but we flush it anyway. Everyone in this thread is suddenly zero-waste zealots.

Presumably until it comes to incremental updates to a phone, laptop, video game system, etc
Post reply on HN