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

YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

news18.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 584 posts

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#401

Post by concordDance »

LordDragonfang wrote: post #349
fooqux wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the other guy is saying the same thing you are. The radical left and the radical right both think each other's points are dangerous. And the moderates are pointing at both sides and claiming the same thing. From their respective viewpoints, they're in the "right", just as you think you are. There's a slippery slope here, and I feel it's one so large that we can't even tell we're already sliding on…

>The obvious answer is a well-informed populace that isn't easily swayed by emotion and fear, and has the time and inclination to do their own fact checking. Trouble is, that's obviously a pipe dream. The other trouble is that one side is actively opposed to a "well informed populace" and unironically calls secondary education "liberal brainwashing camps". If you want a well informed populace, you have to privilege t…

Well... the "other side" would oppose informing the populace that the equality dogma is false (or at least unproven), so it isn't just the far right that likes their myths.

Attemps to ban things that are false runs into the difficulty that you need to first determine what is false, which is hard to do if one of the answers might contradict an important value.

I should stop replying to political posts with more politics. :/

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#402

Post by concordDance »

uniqueid wrote: post #328
fooqux wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the other guy is saying the same thing you are. The radical left and the radical right both think each other's points are dangerous. And the moderates are pointing at both sides and claiming the same thing. From their respective viewpoints, they're in the "right", just as you think you are. There's a slippery slope here, and I feel it's one so large that we can't even tell we're already sliding on…

The problem is that the other guy is saying the same thing you are. Then I hope I win. Cause the other guy really likes firearms and believes Bill Gates is some sort of satanic reptilian timelord. Facebook's new governing body are interesting, but I fear will be troublesome in other ways. I don't see that model making anyone happy because I believe true impartiality is impossible. The honest and less bureaucratic app…

You seem to be conflating racists with believing Bill Gates is a lizardman. While there may be some overlap I don't think that's an accurate look at the world.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#403

Post by [deleted] »

Fogest wrote: post #287
onethought wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If someone tries to dismiss an opinion by calling someone a "privileged white male" how would that be any better than dismissing someone's opinion for being black? Context matters... if you are in the position of privilege and saying things that you can only say because of your position. Then I can see why some people would dismiss it. The difference is: if you try to dismiss someone in a minority position for sayi…

Then why would race be relevant? Why would someone not just say "you're too privileged to understand"? Why would they instead say "you're just a privileged white male and don't understand"? I disagree with that logic you are using. Your logic seems racist to me. You are assuming a black person = less privileged and a white person = more privileged. I view both of these assumptions as racist. I think it is wrong to as…

[deleted]

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#404

Post by seanhunter »

goblin89 wrote: post #356
grawprog wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I really have to wonder about specifically this instance of political correctness was, how many people were honestly and truly offended by the term 'blacklist' or 'whitelist' before some lignustics, sociology, whatever professer sat down and figured out it should be offensive and told people to be offended? I feel like this about many attempts to make language politically correct, but I really do wonder, was the…

Do a thought experiment and imagine that there was a negatively tinted term in software engineering with %YOURCOUNTRY% or %YOURNATIONALITY% or %YOURPHENOTYPICTRAIT% in the name. E.g., if you’re from the US, “American pointer dereference” or something like that. (A bit far-fetched; to really resonate the experiment should include some invented cultural baggage which is difficult to do on the spot.) I want to think I p…

> A bit far-fetched; to really resonate the experiment should include some invented cultural baggage which is difficult to do on the spot.)

I'll give you a concrete example from the world of finance. In options there are two main forms of exercise. You can have options which can be exercised at expiry and options that can be exercised at any point.[1] When the economist Paul Samuelson started to work on Wall street he was told that he would never truly be able to understand options because he was American and therefore the maths would be too complicated for his mind[2]. So when he came up with the first pricing model that could handle warrants that exercise at any point he named the simple case (at expiry) "European" and the complex case "American" as a dig at his detractors. For that reason to this day we have European and American styles of option exercise.[3]

[1]You can also have options that can be exercised on a given set of dates which are sort of a half-way house but that is a more exotic and recent phenomenon. It is called "Bermudan" because Bermuda is in the ocean between Europe and America.

[2]When I worked in finance (2000-2008) some of this bias still existed. Our swaps desk was almost entirely French.

[3] Reference for the story although it is well known and there are many others https://www.macroption.com/american-vs-european-options/#ori...

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#405

Post by nicky0 »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #361
nicky0 wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Essentually you are saying: "The other side is wrong, and my side is right." It's not really a nuanced point about the broader issue of speech.

Yes, as a general thing saying the other side is wrong and my side is right is just silly, because the other side is saying they're right and your side is wrong, but in the specific case where one side is demonstrably wrong then it isn't silly anymore.

But the other side believes they are demonstrably right too, just as strongly as you do. The way to "win" is to argue against the opponent's viewpoint and persuade the general population of the strength of your argument. To do that you need a platform for open speech. This is Democracy 101.

What you are arguing for is not democracy but "safetyism". You seek a shortcut whereby you can persuade a powerful gatekeeper to silence your oppositon and make you feel better.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#406

Post by matheusmoreira »

andrewzah wrote: post #5

“ The researchers now suggest that social-media platforms should incorporate chess language in their algorithms to avoid future incidents like this.” Or maybe don’t automate banning YouTube channels via nebulous black boxes? Or can advertisers stop being afraid of anything and everything?

> Or can advertisers stop being afraid of anything and everything?

Would be great but it's never happening. They'll continue shaping the internet by threatening to pull support unless everything is changed to match their sensibilities.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#408

Post by swebs »

dagmx wrote: post #128
afavour wrote: post #3

Not sure what a thinly resourced piece like this is doing so high up on HN. There’s really very little evidence that this has anything to do with racial slurs. From a quick read: last June, the channel was banned for “harmful and dangerous” content. The ban was removed in under 24 hours. YouTube has not confirmed the reason. And yet: > Experts suspect that it was the usage of words like "black" and "white" that confu…

> Not sure what a thinly resourced piece like this is doing so high up on HN. Honestly, and anecdotally, I think there's been a large influx of people recently on the right wing spectrum and/or the more outrage driven spectrum. I've noticed a considerable shift in the number of outraged comments and right wing view points in the last few months. I believe this ties in to the deplatforming of Parler. I can only surmis…

I think the problem is that you're taking people who disagree with you on a single issue and lumping them into a general "my enemy" group. (It can be inferred that you see yourself as left wing). I hate "deplatforming" with a passion, but wouldn't mind public healthcare and more corporate regulations.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#409

Post by jobigoud »

Fogest wrote: post #164
10000truths wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see the association as particularly unnatural: black = dark = scary because we cannot see, and white = light = not scary because we can see. The use of the term ‘black’ as a negative modifier predates its use as a descriptor for race.

This is the problem. People will choose to ignore context and other grammatical history because of their own personal incorrect views. It's not like the word "black" is just used with blacklist. We also use it in other places like black market, black hat, and black site. None of these are related to black people, but instead all relate to a shady dark/scary side of things like you mentioned. When someone pictures a b…

> None of these are related to black people, but instead all relate to a shady dark/scary side of things like you mentioned.

Isn't it the other way around though? Black people skin is not of color black as in actual black. And white people skin is certainly not white.

It's the naming of skin tone that is sloppy and figurative. While the association of white with light/visibility and black with darkness/unknown is natural.

Re: YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

#410

Post by curlypaul924 »

SilverRed wrote: post #340
das4119 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly the whole thing stinks. On the whim of an unaccountable AI basically anything can happen. We need laws around this sooner rather than later. AIs are getting more powerful but less responsible. Just don't have an argument about a book or you could end up on death row. Gordon Dickson wrote a short story about this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computers_Don%27t_Argue

Youtube is in between a rock and a hard place as well as all user generated content sites. Either they automate removing content and end up removing some of the good with the mountains of bad, or they do it manually which costs a fortune and is too slow. The local news is still ridiculing Facebook because they left the stream up for the NZ shooting for hours and their stated reason "No one watching the video had repo…

> Either they automate removing content and end up removing some of the good with the mountains of bad, or they do it manually which costs a fortune and is too slow.

I think this is a false dichotomy; they could automate flagging for human review instead. This would address the cost though not the speed.

Content awaiting review could be disabled, or it could be disabled only if it is deemed sufficiently egregious.

Post reply on HN