81–90 of 236 posts
YouTube has been hitting me up with "ads" which are Ethereum scams¹ recently. Of what I've reported, 60% are still up. Some of these were reported in March. Recently I also got an "ad" for what was almost certainly Sovereign Citizen propaganda, which … wow , I didn't even know they ran YT ads?² Today's ads (since I checked just to see for this comment) is all normal stuff. ¹they allege to have written an "arbitrage"…
I find it really interesting Facebook collect money from someone to run these ads, and they can continue to do that without getting into legal trouble. When I moved countries it took 6 months for Facebook to stop showing me ads for the old country which were very clearly only supposed to be shown to people in that country. Again, people are paying money to run these ads and Facebook are clearly showing them to the wr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube is probably a bad example in terms of copyright. They in fact have the most restrictive system of reuse of others work in your work, as a large portion of the videos that are auto struck would probably err more on fair use.
I'm not in this space, but from the user's perspective I thought that youtube's "Demonitization" doesn't mean the ad doesn't show, just that the channel doesn't get any benefit from the show of the ad. So they're actually incentivized to have many creators struck, because struck media means ad impressions whose revenue they need not share. Am I misunderstanding the landscape?
There's just no excuse for this anymore – why don't they apply their own state-of-the-art LLMs to analyze these and flag the adds as pushing potentially illegal substances? Because as it's painfully obvious now, Meta doesn't care, they're happy to take the money.
The moment the regulator asks them to do something, the cost of running the classifier will instead be compared to legal expense and lobbying attempts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On my phone, only about half of the Youtube ads look legal. They have it all: crypto scams, ponzi schemes, fake mobile games, get quick rich schemes... Some stuff can always slip through but to have a result like this, there's a systemic lack of checks at Google.
So your solution is for YT/Google/Meta to check the code, operations, finances, and business models of every advertiser that comes to them? Even if YT/Google/Meta could do this at scale, do you want them to have that power?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm trying to get more into self hosting and things like federation that can allow technical people to be admins of low-maintenance services for their friends and family. It's a slow push but it's gonna happen. Microtransactions are stuck in deployment hell, advertisements are a deal with the devil, and this is the only third option I know of
You might be interested in my AGPL federated social network, Jonline, which I've built specifically for this purpose. Source is at https://github.com/JonLatane/jonline , and I have a few instances up at https://jonline.io ("flagship"/demo server), https://bullcity.social (Durham, NC community), and https://oakcity.social (Raleigh, NC community). It's a pure Rust server so it's extremely lightweight to self-host compa…
apt-get install yourpackage
There's just no excuse for this anymore – why don't they apply their own state-of-the-art LLMs to analyze these and flag the adds as pushing potentially illegal substances? Because as it's painfully obvious now, Meta doesn't care, they're happy to take the money.
LLMs create text. They don't understand them in the traditional sense. LLMs are backwards. Much like how Stable Diffusion is text-to-image, not image-to-text. You need to rework the neural network entirely to do what you're asking. ------- Its a neat trick that you can train LLMs to perhaps, ingest "text" followed by a question (ex: "Is the previous paragraph spam?"), and then the text-generator generates a yes-or-no…
Image recognition too, of course (using Machine Learning). My point is that, all the stuff FB has spent billions on in the last few years, they have the ability to fix these issues in their sleep.
As others have said, the key is that regulators are absent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A recent brand of gummies was found to have 4-ACO-DMT in them, which is a prodrug of psilocin. https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/07/diamond-shruumz-cand...
>found to have 4-ACO-DMT in them that's a legal and unscheduled substance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O-Acetylpsilocin
> it would be considered akin to a Schedule I Controlled Substance under the Federal Analogue Act if sold for human consumption.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On my phone, only about half of the Youtube ads look legal. They have it all: crypto scams, ponzi schemes, fake mobile games, get quick rich schemes... Some stuff can always slip through but to have a result like this, there's a systemic lack of checks at Google.
So your solution is for YT/Google/Meta to check the code, operations, finances, and business models of every advertiser that comes to them? Even if YT/Google/Meta could do this at scale, do you want them to have that power?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What even is faceless marketing?
Apparently it is, literally - get this - marketing without putting your face in from of a camera. Because we all know that was the only way to do marketing before. All that juice from just one bag of oranges!