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

YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

middleeasteye.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 334 posts

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#201

Post by tankenmate »

cvsh wrote: post #32
viridian wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I remember correctly, the exact same message was delivered to Jordan Peterson a couple of weeks ago or so, before he sat down with the google memo guy. He was in the middle of a bible lecture series, and Google banned his account, and sent the exact same "we've determined that your video does violate our Community Guidelines and have upheld our original decision. We appreciate your understanding." message. It seem…

The worst part of the information age is arbitration by unreasonable and impenetrable algorithms rather than humans with the capacity to make a judgement call when the rules clearly don't account for the situation at hand. A transparent appeals process staffed by humans who can at least deliver a rationale, including what rule you broke, should be required by law. There's irreparable reputational damage associated wi…

I think the biggest problem is that unlike a judicial decision the thought process (including any highlighted pros and cons) that accompanies a decision is entirely missing.

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#202

Post by mcguire »

snerbles wrote: post #22
Hasknewbie wrote: post #9

Youtube's response regarding one of these videos documenting abuses (emphasis mine): > "we've determined that your video does violate our Community Guidelines and have upheld our original decision. We appreciate your understanding ." Can someone explain to me why corporations, when interacting with customers regarding complaints/appeals, seem to have "don't forget to add insult to injury" as one of their motto more o…

Internal studies probably correlates such language with reduced pushback from users.

The wall of jello defense. Works well.

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#203

Post by squarefoot »

hossbeast wrote: post #148
pmoriarty wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, the process needs to be much more than merely transparent. It needs to be independent. That means that it needs to be done by an entity outside of Google itself, and not in any way associated with or influenced by Google.

Google is a company. You want video hosting to be run by the government?

There is very little difference between a company and a government when the first can lobby (read: bribe) the second.

I for one would welcome my files being hosted by the government if we lived in a world where democracy isn't more utopian than flying pink unicorns; as a citizen I would have a slight chance of being respected and listened to because I'd be a part of that, albeit a very small one, whilst with a company you have zero chances unless you're a stock holder or work there in some high rank. That's something to keep in mind next time they want to brainwash people about how good is privatization of public property.

We're slowly but steadily going towards a future where governments will first be owned by corporations, then will cease to exist or be relegated to a purely PR role (think about the royal families in nations still having them). That will likely mark the start of the worst period humanity will ever live in.

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#204

Post by chongli »

viridian wrote: post #29
Hasknewbie wrote: post #9

Youtube's response regarding one of these videos documenting abuses (emphasis mine): > "we've determined that your video does violate our Community Guidelines and have upheld our original decision. We appreciate your understanding ." Can someone explain to me why corporations, when interacting with customers regarding complaints/appeals, seem to have "don't forget to add insult to injury" as one of their motto more o…

If I remember correctly, the exact same message was delivered to Jordan Peterson a couple of weeks ago or so, before he sat down with the google memo guy. He was in the middle of a bible lecture series, and Google banned his account, and sent the exact same "we've determined that your video does violate our Community Guidelines and have upheld our original decision. We appreciate your understanding." message. It seem…

Whenever I see these stories, it reminds me of the phrase "the lights are on but nobody's home." Google gives the impression that nobody actually works there. That the whole thing is just an automated system and that sometimes people fall through the cracks.

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#205

Post by pmoriarty »

briandear wrote: post #180
cloakandswagger wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-The services provided by Google and Facebook have an unassailable majority of market share and are relied on by a huge amount of people. -They enjoy a de facto monopoly and are protected by the extreme cost, risk and time involved in building competing services. -Finally, they have a potential for abuse (say, with selective censorship or politically biased algorithms) that could essentially curb the Constitutional r…

Trusting government to regulate Facebook? No way. I lived in China; I have seen how that story plays out. Some people really do have a naïve trust in government. Free markets are the answer. Who has actually made a legitimate attempt to compete with Google or Facebook? What VCs are investing in Facebook alternatives? MySpace was unstoppable – until it wasn’t. Yahoo owned search – until it didn’t. Perhaps there ought…

"Trusting government to regulate Facebook? No way. I lived in China; I have seen how that story plays out."

Are you really claiming that very government that tries to regulate corporations is going to wind up like China?

You know there are lots of governments around the world that regulate corporations, and most aren't anything like China.

"Some people really do have a naïve trust in government. Free markets are the answer."

Some people really do have a naive trust in free markets.

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#207

Post by chongli »

the8472 wrote: post #151
viridian wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the bigger issue is that certain companies have near monopolies in their spaces to start with. For plebs like myself, youtube is really the only viable option I have to distribute video media if I hope to build an audience. The fact that you effectively can't mount an alternative to facebook, youtube, etc due to network effects is the larger disease, and this is one of many symptoms.

I think the only solution is a distributed and decentralized web. Distributed hosting of static content is a sorta-solved problem. But curating, linking and discoverability (which require mutating content) is a lot harder due to the trust anchor problem.

I think the only solution is a distributed and decentralized web.

I love the idea but one problem: who pays for it? It's a special case of the co-operative vs corporation problem. Without an individual's starting capital, how do you get off the ground?

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#208

Post by colejohnson66 »

AmIFirstToThink wrote: post #199

Why not create a setting that allows user to see YouTube as sanitized by their AI or all content? Allow people to chose content level just like they choose security level in browser settings. 1. Legal content. May include content that violates YouTube content policy, but is legal in USA, or the country of the viewer. Maximum freedom of speech and maximum ability to see content that you may find offending. 2. YouTube…

Because YouTube doesn’t care about the videos; it cares about the advertisers. You can’t be a proponent of free speech (extremist propaganda) while trying to please advertisers. Also, with today’s political climate, people seem like they want anything that disagrees with them to be labeled as hate speech.

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#209

Post by krapp »

jMyles wrote: post #187
krapp wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If the violence inherent in the state is undesirable - and I agree that it is - then we need to build a society in which the free market selects for societal good. That's not a free market though. The unfortunate truth is, if you want "societal good" to be guaranteed, (given some definition of that) you have to force it to be so - which is what the violence of the state is intended for. Otherwise markets take the pa…

> That's not a free market though. > markets take the path of least resistance to greatest profit I assert that a society in which love and compassion are the orders of the day will, in the demands and price signals it sends to the market, not abide by this orthodoxy. > if you want "societal good" to be guaranteed, (given some definition of that) you have to force it to be so - which is what the violence of the state…

>I assert that a society in which love and compassion are the orders of the day will, in the demands and price signals it sends to the market, not abide by this orthodoxy.

Such a market (and society) would seem contrary to human nature, therein lies the problem. People are willing to tolerate mob violence, rape and slavery to spend a bit less for their smartphones.

    If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were 
    to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government 
    would be necessary. 
    --Alexander Hamilton

Re: YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

#210

Post by nthcolumn »

AmIFirstToThink wrote: post #155

What did they train the AI on to deem something 'extremist'? Should we get to see the training data used and labels? Or is this the modern day equivalent of credit score algo, something that can have huge impact on lives, but you are not allowed to know what it is. This is bad.

We will have to get used to this - people hiding behind their AI's skirts saying 'Wasn't me - she did it'.
Post reply on HN