271–280 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can say the same thing about Jordan Peterson, no? Content from 5-10 years ago was interesting. Now I have him muted on X.
I'm convinced that these platforms are a huge driver, if not the main driver of social and political polarisation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not even an allegation, it’s a news story. It’s pretty crazy that they would do this because of a story, not even criminal charges being brought. Apparently you don’t even have to get formally accused anymore. People say “it’s bad for advertising” but these acts of extreme abuse of moderation on YouTube have hugely contributed to other websites springing up. I have no doubt their market share overall is slipping…
Your post was already outdated. Abuse charges have to be reported to the police, and the police is investigating, as is his employer at the time the BBC. Your spinning this as “just a story” is disingenuous. This “story” was investigated by top journalists for over a year, and published in a prestige news journal. Both the journalists working on the story and the paper that published it have their journalistic integr…
Gosh, imagine if this story tarnished their pristine reputation and that of the paper’s owner, Rupert Murdoch.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_International_phone_hacki...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're still hosting the videos, still running ads, but YT keeps all the money. Seems... not right and backwards to me.
Hosting isn't free and they're not forcing anyone to host it there, there are alternative platforms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "innocent until proven guilty" only applies in a court of law. “Innocent until proven guilty” is a philosophical concept that many legal systems subscribe to in the context of criminal law. > Similar to when people cite the 1st amendment in situations where a private company is taking action Indeed, it’s very similar in the sense that the concept of the freedom of speech goes way beyond the 1st amendment. It existe…
> Yeah, including immoral actions that others may disagree with. The morality in this instance does not follow this principle. If people find these allegations credible—and most should—the morally correct action is to deplatform him and delete his content.
Why?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then let’s change the law. It’s obvious over the past few years that companies can’t be trusted with freedom of association or freedom of speech. Let’s strip them of both. If you are incorporated (and therefore benefit from government-provided protection from liability and lower tax rates) then you no longer get to choose your customers; you’re a common carrier and must provide the same service to all customers. You…
Everything would be overrun by spam. Even 4chan moderates spam and ads.
They remove child pornography. They comply with DMCA. They ban entire countries.
The Monetization Window is the new Overton Window. I think people underestimate how much Youtube's monetization policy influences what popular creators put in videos. Because it's not just the money - it also effects how videos are promoted by the algorithm.
This is a very interesting point. Tech-media companies (Google, Meta, Tik Tok) increasingly serve a similar gatekeeper function for public discourse that TV networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) did 50 years ago. This... actually is a hopeful insight to me.
I wrote a thing a few years ago after reading one of the case studies in John Doerr’s OKR book that used YT as an example, I think the point I was trying to make likely still stands https://www.jacquescorbytuech.com/writing/okr-youtube-uninte...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it even "the algorithm" or is it simply just how people prefer to click crazy shit? We see it with news and pretty much anything else where clicks equal money.
"The algorithm" and/or the people behind it noticed that if User1 watches VideoA and then we show him B-C-D, he stays on the platform for 10 minutes. BUT when we showed a User2 the videos X-Y-Z (after videoA), then User2 stayed "engaged" for 3 hours. And the new sequence was just established. The 'machine' is constantly doing A/B and other tests, and it learns, adapts, and continues. The machine just learns what peop…
I wish there was a viable alternative to everything Google (search, youtube, android, maps to name a few). I can't wait for Elon to buy Google and end this BS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"innocent until proven guilty" only applies in a court of law. Similar to when people cite the 1st amendment in situations where a private company is taking action, this phrase is meaningless here. A private company can do what it wants within the bounds of the law.
> "innocent until proven guilty" only applies in a court of law. “Innocent until proven guilty” is a philosophical concept that many legal systems subscribe to in the context of criminal law. > Similar to when people cite the 1st amendment in situations where a private company is taking action Indeed, it’s very similar in the sense that the concept of the freedom of speech goes way beyond the 1st amendment. It existe…
Once you venture into private parties evaluating other private parties, you encounter a collision of rights. It's still freedom of speech and association to not want to do business with certain people, and as long as those certain people aren't of a protected class, this falls well within the moral concepts of both free speech and presumption of innocence.
Putting aside recent allegations, it's disappointing what has happened to Russell Brand's YouTube channel. I watched some of his videos a few years ago and they were interesting discussions of the news with a particular emphasis on questioning everything which I see as a healthy habit. Inevitably though, the algorithm steered the videos to become more clickbaity, divisive, and frankly crazy. He probably saw that outr…
> the algorithm steered He steered. We should not remove his agency for the content he wrote, said, recorded, and uploaded.