Live data from Hacker News

YouTube blocked chess channel after mistaken detection of racial slurs

news18.com

511–520 of 584 posts

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

#511
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose you could replace "master" with "graduate"

What if you graduate with an associate or bachelor's degree instead?

"graduate degree" (pronounced gra-jə-wət) is generally understood to mean master's degree (or uncommonly, PhD).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graduate_school

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

#512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertisers, youtubers, users, brands - everyone was happy prior to the era of demonetization. What killed the golden goose was an extremely small set of activists and journalists (specifically Media Matters and Vox) methodically threatening brands with publication of screenshots of their "support" for controversial niche videos. And just enough brand marketing and YouTube employees were cowed, or at least ideologica…

Our monkey brains are not evolved to deal with the satisfaction barrage, the microdosed dopamine of incremental reputation tallies and continually met expectations. Social media platforms weaponise the limbic system in support of commerce, and once habituated, regrettably few people display a reflexive defiance when the same mechanisms are hijacked by hostile actors & propagandists. As any student of history knows, t…

>> an extremely small set of activists and journalists

>This ratifies the well-known aphorism that a small group of dedicated individuals can change the world. It does not undermine the necessity for showing assholes the door.

Wonderful. And the "asshole" designation that these Elect ("extremely small set of ..." as was put above) - how do they get to decide who's an asshole and gets shown the door, what are their criteria and what is the procedure for the rest of us to appeal or ratify their decision-making?

Can we at least agree that censors can make mistakes, or have their own biases? And shouldn't censors be policed as well, so they are accountable to the public?

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

#513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertisers, youtubers, users, brands - everyone was happy prior to the era of demonetization. What killed the golden goose was an extremely small set of activists and journalists (specifically Media Matters and Vox) methodically threatening brands with publication of screenshots of their "support" for controversial niche videos. And just enough brand marketing and YouTube employees were cowed, or at least ideologica…

This isn't true. I am sure that you believe it's true, but advertisers have been used to being able to control what content they were put next to for a long time. I don't know whether it matters, or is valuable, but I do know that they have cared for long enough that it has been one of the largest influences on literally what television programs got made (even if this influence appears oblique, it has been one of the…

Depends on the price the advertiser pays. You can buy an ad, or you can buy and ad in a particular place. You don't get to choose what Dear Abby says in her column, but enough advertisers like what she says (that is the people who read her column and see the ad next to it - they don't care what she actually says, just that it gets eyeballs for him).

News papers have long had a policy that the advertising department wasn't in control of what the news said. The advertisers didn't like it, but they went with it because they knew that it is what the eyeballs wanted.

There is a fine line though - some companies didn't advertise in particular outlets (playboy is an obvious example), which might or might not work out for them.

The question is where is the power. YouTube is acting like they don't have power here, but in fact they do: a large portion of video is on YouTube, and so if YouTube says "too bad, either give us your money or not", the advertisers will need to pay up. Of course there is a cost to youtube in doing that which they might not be willing to pay: some advertisers will say no. Others will tell youtube fine, but we are not willing to pay as much as you could get if we got more control who sees us.

The question isn't where the power is, the question is how much money does YouTube need/want?

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

#514
post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertisers, youtubers, users, brands - everyone was happy prior to the era of demonetization. What killed the golden goose was an extremely small set of activists and journalists (specifically Media Matters and Vox) methodically threatening brands with publication of screenshots of their "support" for controversial niche videos. And just enough brand marketing and YouTube employees were cowed, or at least ideologica…

It's stupid, because in the era of television, people understood that the advertising commercial breaks in programmes were distinct from the actual content of the programme, and that the advertisers are _not_ endorsing the contents of the programme at all! How this somehow translated, in the era of online youtube videos, to the exact opposite is still a mystery to me. So what if your ad appeared next to something rad…

Not in the early days. The Soap in Soap Operas was because you never knew when the ad for the soap company sponsoring the show would show up. There wasn't a break, it was ", and then I used my XYZ soap to"... until you got to the "and" the audience didn't know the ad was coming.

The ad breaks came later as TV realized that the ad was forever part of the show and so they didn't get more money when the did a rerun.

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

#515
post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is politics, and the fact that so many of us have managed to stay unaware and insulated from that for so long, is one of the clearest indicators of privilege there is.

So here I am talking about someone dismissing what someone says by calling them privileged and boom, one of them shows up! What did this contribute to the conversation? Good job you got your jab in calling me privileged in a conversation where I am talking about how stupid of a response that is that people will say.

How is calling someone privileged considered a "jab"?

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

#516
post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But are not now. There are groups with similar messages that never had any power. BLM also have supporters in the highest positions and also influenced police and lawmaking, some places actually did defunded their police force. My point still stands. According to that definition, in the alternate universe KKK or NSDAP would not be considered racist, if they didn't have the majority of support.

Saying that racism in the US is a systemic issue does not imply that individual racism does not exist. One is the basis of the other, as people with racist views implement racist laws and systems, which in turn embolden more people. The KKK didn't come out of nowhere, they came out of a deeply racist society and system. Similarly the NSDAP didn't come out of nowhere, they came out of a racist (deeply anti-semitic) so…

You know, you say things about having a privilege of being ignorant, but you seem to be unaware that this is exactly what you're doing. You all have the privilege of basically downplaying racism to be a just systemic issue of black people not earning or being employed as much, or cops shooting slightly more black people than white people. You have no clue just how much things can go south to the point where there isn't even any system in place and all you have left are the actual horrors of war, that the Hollywood movies won't ever show you.

You're blaming Trump for calling for violence, not because he did, but because his audience interprets what he says as such, and at the same time you say things like "all white people are racist" and expect everyone to understand the intricacies of the white privilege theory. In Europe we had those things called "pogroms" that were massacres organized by the usual day-to-day folks, with zero influence over the system. So it wasn't racism according to you, I guess. It's within the realm of possibility that you soon might have the benefit of your white privilege of finding yourself at the receiving end of one of such massacres.

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

#517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the "other side" would oppose informing the populace that the equality dogma is false (or at least unproven) What do you mean by the equality dogma?

More or less the belief that we are all equal with equal potential (it's more or less a consequence of egalitarianism). That if little Timmy just tries hard enough and is given enough support he'll be able to master differential equations.

Do you have an example of where this belief is expressed? Because the common trope afaik is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

What would be the difference in public policy anyways if after-the-fact results differ?

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

#518
post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point I had in mind is that ideology is well and good, but sometimes pragmatism is better. If a desire for free speech, to pick a contemporary example, leads to defending the 'right' of the Myanmar military to use Facebook for their coup to oppress the Burmese, pragmatism is probably better. Consider Qanon people, or NeoNazis, or Boogaloo Boys, etc. It is impossible to prove beyond any doubt that are more dangero…

I agree democracy is messy, but the alternative you suggest is worse.

There isn't enough substance in that comment for me to rebut. People often spout platitudes about liberty and democracy without understanding either. With apologies, I will assume that is the case here.

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

#519
post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that racism in the US is a systemic issue does not imply that individual racism does not exist. One is the basis of the other, as people with racist views implement racist laws and systems, which in turn embolden more people. The KKK didn't come out of nowhere, they came out of a deeply racist society and system. Similarly the NSDAP didn't come out of nowhere, they came out of a racist (deeply anti-semitic) so…

You know, you say things about having a privilege of being ignorant, but you seem to be unaware that this is exactly what you're doing. You all have the privilege of basically downplaying racism to be a just systemic issue of black people not earning or being employed as much, or cops shooting slightly more black people than white people. You have no clue just how much things can go south to the point where there isn…

Don't worry they will let you know you're privileged again to explain why you don't get the mental gymnastics required to make sense of this crap.

So much of the stuff I hear groups like BLM say is very far from being true and isn't based on any stats. They often operate very similar to a terror group and do cause a lot of actual terror. Businesses get destroyed, burned down, they attack federal buildings, they attack police, they attack white people who disagree with their ideology, they attack politicians who disagree, they riot outside of politics houses or people who disagree with them, etc. I'm sick of this being deemed somehow "ok" when if a different group did it they would get labeled as a terrorist group. It baffles me how a small group like "Proud Boys" can be labeled as a terror group despite being leagues less dangerous than BLM. The BLM roots caused over $1 Billion in insurance costs alone. If that isn't a terror group I don't know what is.

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

#520
post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that racism in the US is a systemic issue does not imply that individual racism does not exist. One is the basis of the other, as people with racist views implement racist laws and systems, which in turn embolden more people. The KKK didn't come out of nowhere, they came out of a deeply racist society and system. Similarly the NSDAP didn't come out of nowhere, they came out of a racist (deeply anti-semitic) so…

You know, you say things about having a privilege of being ignorant, but you seem to be unaware that this is exactly what you're doing. You all have the privilege of basically downplaying racism to be a just systemic issue of black people not earning or being employed as much, or cops shooting slightly more black people than white people. You have no clue just how much things can go south to the point where there isn…

All such cases of pogroms, ethnic cleansing and so on in recorded human history, happened because of systems that openly, tacitly or implicitly accepted or promoted racist views, laws and sentiments. In some cases the inaction of the system allowed them to happen, in other cases the system directly inflamed them to happen. In others yet, the system (by extension the military and others directly under command of the system) directly perpetrated these acts.

I say the root cause is systemic, you say the root cause is individual. One cannot exist without the other, but I say it all boils down to a systemic issue causing the individual issues.

Post reply on HN