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

Our ongoing work to tackle hate

youtube.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 42 posts

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#31

Post by ytNumbers »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #6
ytNumbers wrote: post #2

It's often a shame that network effects are nearly impossible to overcome. It looks like the feature of "less censorship" will never be enough to mount a challenge to YouTube. But, perhaps posts like these from Google will one day succeed in persuading people to start looking elsewhere for videos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_hosting_services

> It looks like the feature of "less censorship" will never be enough to mount a challenge to YouTube. s/censorship/moderation/. And no, "we host everything" is a fast way to kill a potential competitor to YouTube. The first and fastest adopters of such a platform will be the people rejected from other platforms, which rapidly turns any "we host everything" platform into a cesspool that nobody else wants to use.

YouTube could wind up with cesspool videos? The horror!! It's a good thing they've now got these new guidelines in place to remove all the garbage videos. I'm sure that all the remaining allowed videos won't hurt anyone's feelings. /s

I'm not advocating for zero censorship. I just think this reads like they're heading down a slippery slope.

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#32

Post by h2odragon »

happytoexplain wrote: post #16
h2odragon wrote: post #14

Now they're taking responsibility for editing content, we can assume they implicitly endorse anything they haven't banned, right?

That doesn't follow, does it? I sense you're being sarcastic to some extent, but I'm not sure to what end, specifically.

Yes I'm being sarcastic and should make more effort to actually communicate. Thanks.

I'm just pissed off by how many people embrace this shit with no notion of the principles that whizzed past while they were having a 2 minute hate against Nazis. Sure they weren't well served and this is just a public embrace of the biases that have already been in place. They were important though.

The guy who runs a printing press should not take pride in refusing jobs for people he doesn't like, should he? Is his service, which has social impact beyond his neighborhood, supposed to be available to all or would it be a bad thing if he decides not to print newsletters for nazis, or blacks, or this or that church because their doctrine is wrong... None of these are new issues and we've thrashed this shit out before.

I indulge in sarcasm because its quicker. sorry.

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#33

Post by JoshTriplett »

ytNumbers wrote: post #31
JoshTriplett wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It looks like the feature of "less censorship" will never be enough to mount a challenge to YouTube. s/censorship/moderation/. And no, "we host everything" is a fast way to kill a potential competitor to YouTube. The first and fastest adopters of such a platform will be the people rejected from other platforms, which rapidly turns any "we host everything" platform into a cesspool that nobody else wants to use.

YouTube could wind up with cesspool videos? The horror!! It's a good thing they've now got these new guidelines in place to remove all the garbage videos. I'm sure that all the remaining allowed videos won't hurt anyone's feelings. /s I'm not advocating for zero censorship. I just think this reads like they're heading down a slippery slope.

> I just think this reads like they're heading down a slippery slope.

Standing reminder: the "slippery slope" is a fallacy, not an argument. You can do one thing without doing every possible further step past that thing.

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#34

Post by ytNumbers »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #33
ytNumbers wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube could wind up with cesspool videos? The horror!! It's a good thing they've now got these new guidelines in place to remove all the garbage videos. I'm sure that all the remaining allowed videos won't hurt anyone's feelings. /s I'm not advocating for zero censorship. I just think this reads like they're heading down a slippery slope.

> I just think this reads like they're heading down a slippery slope. Standing reminder: the "slippery slope" is a fallacy , not an argument. You can do one thing without doing every possible further step past that thing.

You might be right. I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about YouTube to argue whether or not Google's new censorship policies are quickly getting out of hand. But, someone like Tim Pool seems to be quite well informed on that subject, and he makes a compelling case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoN-MZV7-7c

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#35

Post by tracker1 »

jonathankoren wrote: post #20
onychomys wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure the Nazis and Sandy Hook Truthers will be happy to know there are so many other options. Look, we live in a world where, for better or worse, we don't force publishers to publish anything they don't want to. Youtube telling Nazis to go jump in a lake is no different than your local paper declining to run an editorial from one. It just seems different because the scope is so much bigger.

Exactly. You have a freedom to speak. You don't have a freedom to use someone else's forum to gain an audience. No more than I have a right to walk into your house and do whatever I want.

Funny, I seem to recall all sorts of instances where the government has forced people and businesses to cater to those that they don't want to... Hell, Title IX is based on the premise of providing equal access by protected classes.

And for reference, political party is a protected class in DC, and that could extend to other areas. Politicians aren't allowed to block people on Twitter or Facebook, it's only a matter of time before the companies themselves aren't allowed to in many conditions.

There's also the concept of a public space in private ownership to consider. There's a big difference between your living room and a restaurant or park.

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#36

Post by burfog »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #33
ytNumbers wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube could wind up with cesspool videos? The horror!! It's a good thing they've now got these new guidelines in place to remove all the garbage videos. I'm sure that all the remaining allowed videos won't hurt anyone's feelings. /s I'm not advocating for zero censorship. I just think this reads like they're heading down a slippery slope.

> I just think this reads like they're heading down a slippery slope. Standing reminder: the "slippery slope" is a fallacy , not an argument. You can do one thing without doing every possible further step past that thing.

Believing every slippery slope to be a fallacy is itself a fallacy.

The same goes with conspiracy theories. They aren't all wrong!

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#37

Post by googlethrosdjn »

challenger22 wrote: post #7

I imagine there's boiler room full of guys somewhere tagging videos as "Borderline content", creating data which then feeds into a machine learning algorithm which decides which videos get promoted. All videos are metricized by the similarity to borderline content, and are increasingly likely to be promoted in proportion to increasing graph distance from the borderline content. Youtube management gets nice plausible…

I have personal experience with working on recommendations at google and you are pretty off. It was based on increasing engagement, user satisfaction, quality and on reducing controversial news coverage of google(this meant removing the right-wing content which could lead to media outrage no more no less). In addition there were a lot of left leaning googlers who had a personal agenda to suppress all right-leaning content.

You are right that it was a room full of guys, but what you may not realize is a majority was Chinese or Indian.

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#38

Post by jonathankoren »

tracker1 wrote: post #35
jonathankoren wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. You have a freedom to speak. You don't have a freedom to use someone else's forum to gain an audience. No more than I have a right to walk into your house and do whatever I want.

Funny, I seem to recall all sorts of instances where the government has forced people and businesses to cater to those that they don't want to... Hell, Title IX is based on the premise of providing equal access by protected classes. And for reference, political party is a protected class in DC, and that could extend to other areas. Politicians aren't allowed to block people on Twitter or Facebook, it's only a matter…

None of this is relevant. None of these protected classes are applicable here. Nothing has ever been about compelled speech or compelled publication.

If you really believe where you’re argument is going, I demand you give me your twitter account to use, so I can tweet whatever I want. If you don’t do that, you’re censoring me, and I guess I should sue you or something.

I’m not hard find online. I’ll be waiting for your DM.

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#39

Post by tracker1 »

jonathankoren wrote: post #38
tracker1 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I seem to recall all sorts of instances where the government has forced people and businesses to cater to those that they don't want to... Hell, Title IX is based on the premise of providing equal access by protected classes. And for reference, political party is a protected class in DC, and that could extend to other areas. Politicians aren't allowed to block people on Twitter or Facebook, it's only a matter…

None of this is relevant. None of these protected classes are applicable here. Nothing has ever been about compelled speech or compelled publication. If you really believe where you’re argument is going, I demand you give me your twitter account to use, so I can tweet whatever I want. If you don’t do that, you’re censoring me, and I guess I should sue you or something. I’m not hard find online. I’ll be waiting for yo…

At one point, protected classes weren't... then they were... The government cannot restrict your access, but they can force companies to expand it to be more equal.

Re: Our ongoing work to tackle hate

#40

Post by jonathankoren »

tracker1 wrote: post #39
jonathankoren wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of this is relevant. None of these protected classes are applicable here. Nothing has ever been about compelled speech or compelled publication. If you really believe where you’re argument is going, I demand you give me your twitter account to use, so I can tweet whatever I want. If you don’t do that, you’re censoring me, and I guess I should sue you or something. I’m not hard find online. I’ll be waiting for yo…

At one point, protected classes weren't... then they were... The government cannot restrict your access, but they can force companies to expand it to be more equal.

You’re still not making a good argument that a publisher refusing to publish a submission is censorship.

I’m also still waiting for that DM. Why are you censoring me?

Post reply on HN