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

YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 305 posts

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#41

Post by b3kart »

kodablah wrote: post #38
b3kart wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, we have to make sure we're OK with the consequences of going this way. Would people be happy to wait for days, maybe weeks, for their video to be approved for upload to YouTube? Would that work with the current society's attention span? Is YouTube as we know it actually feasible without AI-based moderation? Can it be a sustainable business with an army of human moderators and/or a drastically reduced sc…

I think the argument is framed as wanting a human during take down dispute, not pre-approval. There's no need to treat this as an absolute. Why are human contact and reasonable expediency considered mutually exclusive? There is a lot of room in the middle. Can allow human dispute resolution for non-free accounts (i.e. paid or earning). Can limit upload frequency site wide while dispute/abuse queues are backed up (kno…

Agree wholeheartedly: there's definitely a spectrum between what Google are doing atm and full human moderation. I am a strong believer in using AI to augment humans, not replace them. Nudging Google towards putting more humans in the pipeline is what I am hoping posts like this are achieving.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#42

Post by FpUser »

I am sure it is ok to use AI to cheapen initial screening. This FAANG and the like set of companies are becoming vital for people to the point that sometime they can loose their income. I see nothing wrong with those that serve as a source of income being declared as utility type service with the mandatory staged conflict resolution process. Said process at the last stage (well before the actual lawsuit) would include being able to present proof to the actual human being/s who has the power to reverse the decision and is paid for but not employed by said utility. In case of utility failing to comply that watchdog should be able to levy fines. This should also help to prevent cases when the utility "moderation" is based on the political (other similar in nature) opinions of the owners.

All this "I am a private company and do as I please" when it comes to a very big companies is baloney. They have way too much power and should be held responsible for how this power being used. Preventing them from being able to lobby governments should be of first priority as well.

Since the companies of that type are international it is of course up to the individual governments to implement whatever if any measures they would see fit.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#43

Post by adrianN »

foepys wrote: post #22
adrianN wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who pays for the moderators? You still need a lot of manpower if you don't want algorithms, regardless of whether you have one Youtube or a thousand SpecialInterestTube.

Tech is very special in a way where they can get away with claiming that quite a lot is not possible at their scale. Imagine this for other industries. "We cannot do quality control before sending products out. We make too much stuff." "We don't check all tickets for the venue. Too many people." "Cleaning the entire building is not possible. It's too much space."

There are few other industries where users expect to get everything for free.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#44

Post by tinco »

adrianN wrote: post #20
izacus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if... instead of YouTube you'd have several intereset based sites which could actually handle their moderation and workload instead of being a giant uncaring behemoth?

Who pays for the moderators? You still need a lot of manpower if you don't want algorithms, regardless of whether you have one Youtube or a thousand SpecialInterestTube.

Google had a revenue of $180B in 2020, and their EBITDA was $55B. I'm no accountant but that sounds like an absolutely insane profit margin. 8-12% would seem much more palatable, so that means they have over 25B of excess profits they could spend on 500.000 middle class incomes for content moderators.

YouTube represents 10% of Google's income BTW, so the other 90% of middle class incomes could do moderation for their other services.

Is that naieve?

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#45

Post by danhor »

qayxc wrote: post #32
Jan454 wrote: post #9

Maybe it's time for a public company-independent complains-platform where all companies are obliged by law to respond. Each complaint of course is hidden behind some anti-bot captcha/protection so that the companies themselve can't use AI to answer your complaints.

That's basically what the author suggests when they say: > Anyhow, I truly believe humanity has to rollback to operating at a human scale. It's impossible to operate a complaints-platform on a global scale if it's run by humans. According to GMI [0], 500 hours of content are uploaded every minute. Given an average video duration of about 12 minutes [1], that would be 2500 videos per hour. That's just too much to manu…

*2500 videos per minute

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#46

Post by JohnWhigham »

izacus wrote: post #17
b3kart wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, we have to make sure we're OK with the consequences of going this way. Would people be happy to wait for days, maybe weeks, for their video to be approved for upload to YouTube? Would that work with the current society's attention span? Is YouTube as we know it actually feasible without AI-based moderation? Can it be a sustainable business with an army of human moderators and/or a drastically reduced sc…

What if... instead of YouTube you'd have several intereset based sites which could actually handle their moderation and workload instead of being a giant uncaring behemoth?

That may have worked in the pre-iPhone Internet, where it took effort to become a part of communities, and everyone implicitly understood that. Now, it's a rock vs. a hard place: the masses want centralized platforms, but those centralized platforms are proving cancerous to society.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#47

Post by api »

JohnWhigham wrote: post #46
izacus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if... instead of YouTube you'd have several intereset based sites which could actually handle their moderation and workload instead of being a giant uncaring behemoth?

That may have worked in the pre-iPhone Internet, where it took effort to become a part of communities, and everyone implicitly understood that. Now, it's a rock vs. a hard place: the masses want centralized platforms, but those centralized platforms are proving cancerous to society.

The masses don’t want centralized platforms or decentralized platforms. The masses don’t care how things work. What the masses want is an easy to use, fast platform. Centralized systems have been the best at providing that because they are easier to engineer and because there is an economic model via ads and surveillance.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#48

Post by arsome »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #23
asimpletune wrote: post #13

The first part of the post, where they said the got a strike for teaching people how to use pgp... Wow, that’s um, wild

I believe it's still against US law to export pgp to certain countries, as it's considered munitions. Wild is a great description.

Didn't DJB v US pretty much end that? That would also impact things like Firefox for the record.

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#49

Post by BrianOnHN »

m_a_g wrote: post #4

>Anyhow, I truly believe humanity has to rollback to operating at a human scale. >Using algorithms to flag content is totally fine… problem is when humans cannot interact with humans anymore and AI gets to chose what is right and wrong. Can't agree more.

This ignores human bad actors.

There is no "rollback" for the existence of algorithms.

Instead of whining (problems without solutions) spend some time contemplating what a sufficient algorithmic solution looks like.

To be clear, that would be an algorithmic solution that "fights back" against issues like these (and not simply improving a failing solution).

That may not be a competing product. Maybe it's an algorithmic whistleblower?

Re: YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on WPA2 vulnerability

#50

Post by manigandham »

foepys wrote: post #22
adrianN wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who pays for the moderators? You still need a lot of manpower if you don't want algorithms, regardless of whether you have one Youtube or a thousand SpecialInterestTube.

Tech is very special in a way where they can get away with claiming that quite a lot is not possible at their scale. Imagine this for other industries. "We cannot do quality control before sending products out. We make too much stuff." "We don't check all tickets for the venue. Too many people." "Cleaning the entire building is not possible. It's too much space."

There's a massive difference between centralized production of physical goods vs user-generated digital assets. Scale itself becomes the challenge.
Post reply on HN