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

YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 292 posts

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#171

Post by felineflock »

YouTube has responded:

> We hear you, and want to clear things up! This is from an experiment to improve video quality with traditional machine learning – not GenAI. More info from @YouTubeInsider here:

> No GenAI, no upscaling. We're running an experiment on select YouTube Shorts that uses traditional machine learning technology to unblur, denoise, and improve clarity in videos during processing (similar to what a modern smartphone does when you record a video)

> YouTube is always working on ways to provide the best video quality and experience possible, and will continue to take creator and viewer feedback into consideration as we iterate and improve on these features

https://x.com/TeamYouTube/status/1958286550229541158

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#172

Post by smohare »

jimbo808 wrote: post #140
dsign wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The well is already poisoned. I'm refraining from hiring editors merely because I suspect there's a high chance they'll just use an LLM. All recent books I'm reading is with suspicion that they have been written by AI. However, polished to a point that we humans start to lose our unique tone is what style guides that go into the minutiae of comma placement try do do. And I'm currently reading a book I'm 100% sure has…

> suspicion that they have been written by AI "By AI" or "with AI?" If I write the book and have AI proof read things as I go, or critique my ideas, or point out which points do I need to add more support for, is that written "by AI?" When Big Corp says 30% of their code is now written "by AI," did they write the code by following thoughtful instruction from a human expert, who interpeted the work to be done, made de…

[dead]

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#173

Post by haswell »

croes wrote: post #165
hliyan wrote: post #83

A chill ran down my spine as I imagined this being applied to the written word online: my articles being automatically "corrected" or "improved" the moment I hit publish, any book manuscripts being sent to editors being similarly "polished" to a point that we humans start to lose our unique tone and everything we read falls into that strange uncanny valley where everything reads ok, you can't quite put your finger on…

"A spark of excitement ran through me imagining this applied to writing online: my articles receiving instant, supportive refinements the moment I hit publish, and manuscripts arriving to editors already thoughtfully polished—elevating clarity while letting our distinctive voices shine even brighter. The result is a consistently smooth, natural reading experience that feels confidently authentic, faithfully reflectin…

> thoughtfully polished

> enhancing it with care

I get what you’re going for with this comment, but it seamlessly anthropomorphizes what’s happening in a way that has the opposite impact I think.

There is no thoughtfulness or care involved. Only algorithmic conformance to some non-human synthesis of the given style.

The issue is not just about the words that come out the other end. The issue is the loss of the transmission of human thoughts, emotions, preferences, style.

The end result is still just as suspect, and to whatever degree it appears “good”, even more soulless given the underlying reality.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#174

Post by datadrivenangel »

thisisit wrote: post #112
hliyan wrote: post #83

A chill ran down my spine as I imagined this being applied to the written word online: my articles being automatically "corrected" or "improved" the moment I hit publish, any book manuscripts being sent to editors being similarly "polished" to a point that we humans start to lose our unique tone and everything we read falls into that strange uncanny valley where everything reads ok, you can't quite put your finger on…

Everything has to be produced on an assembly line. No mistakes allowed. Especially creativity. /s

the /s is sarcastic right? Artisanal creativity isn't efficient enough.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#175

Post by varelse »

alex1138 wrote: post #16
Springtime wrote: post #11

Youtube says this was done for select Youtube Shorts as a denoising process. However most popular channels on Youtube, which seem to be the pool selected for this experiment, typically already have well lit and graded videos shouldn't benefit much from extra denoising from a visual point of view. It's true though that aggressive denoising gives things an artificially generated look since both processes use denoising…

Can I just start a petition to remove Shorts entirely?

[dead]

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#176

Post by dylan604 »

croes wrote: post #165
hliyan wrote: post #83

A chill ran down my spine as I imagined this being applied to the written word online: my articles being automatically "corrected" or "improved" the moment I hit publish, any book manuscripts being sent to editors being similarly "polished" to a point that we humans start to lose our unique tone and everything we read falls into that strange uncanny valley where everything reads ok, you can't quite put your finger on…

"A spark of excitement ran through me imagining this applied to writing online: my articles receiving instant, supportive refinements the moment I hit publish, and manuscripts arriving to editors already thoughtfully polished—elevating clarity while letting our distinctive voices shine even brighter. The result is a consistently smooth, natural reading experience that feels confidently authentic, faithfully reflectin…

> manuscripts arriving to editors already thoughtfully polished

except those editors will still make changes. that's there job. if they start passing manuscripts through without changes, they'd be nullifying their jobs.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#177

Post by ragequittah »

djfdat wrote: post #144
brookst wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If something needs editing, why would you care what tool they use? It’s like saying you wouldn’t hire an engineer because you suspect they’d use computers rather than pencil and paper.

Because "edited" is not a singular point. It's more like hiring a chef and getting a microwave dinner.

What's the line. If they use Microsoft word or grammarly to ease the process is that OK? Both of which use AI. Is there anyone in the world who isn't using this tech even before an editor looks at it?

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#178

Post by sixothree »

LauraMedia wrote: post #145
ThatMedicIsASpy wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a consumer they are the most hostile platform to consume a video the way I want. Not the way they want me to. I am also required to use an adblocker to disable all shorts.

As a creator, they are also the most hostile platform, randomly removing video with no point of contact for help or fully removing channels (with livelihoods behind them) because of "a system glitch" but again, not point of contact to get it fixed.

Pretty much every creator I follow has complained about something being removed without any clear explanation or the ability to contact anyone and ask questions.

Say what you want about Microsoft, but if I have a problem with something I've pretty much always ended up getting support for that problem. I think Google's lack of response adds to their "mystique".

But it also creates superstitions since creators don't really understand the firm rules to follow.

Regardless, it is one of the most dystopian things about modern society - the lack of accountability for their decisions.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#179

Post by corytheboyd »

cma wrote: post #134
lomase wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean is Rick Beato, he tries really hard to have the most polarizing opinion every single time.

What's the biggest example outside of his thumbnails?

So much of the channel consisting of Hot Spicy Take content really turned me off from hearing anything else he has to say, which is unfortunate, because I liked his music theory videos when I was learning about that.

Lots of very hateful, negative content too. It didn’t take me long to find the video “why this new artist sucks.” Another find, what I assume is an overblown small quibble turned into clickbait videos, was “this record label is trying to SILENCE me.” Maybe, somehow, these two things are related.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#180

Post by croes »

haswell wrote: post #173
croes wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A spark of excitement ran through me imagining this applied to writing online: my articles receiving instant, supportive refinements the moment I hit publish, and manuscripts arriving to editors already thoughtfully polished—elevating clarity while letting our distinctive voices shine even brighter. The result is a consistently smooth, natural reading experience that feels confidently authentic, faithfully reflectin…

> thoughtfully polished > enhancing it with care I get what you’re going for with this comment, but it seamlessly anthropomorphizes what’s happening in a way that has the opposite impact I think. There is no thoughtfulness or care involved. Only algorithmic conformance to some non-human synthesis of the given style. The issue is not just about the words that come out the other end. The issue is the loss of the transm…

You do realize I just took parents comment and gave an AI the prompt to rewrite it by changing everything negative to a positive?
Post reply on HN