Never forget Dehomag:
Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
561–570 of 1001 posts
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#562Try commenting 共匪 on any youtube video, the comment will be deleted after ~15 seconds
Just tried it on a video about WHO and Bruce Alyward. It's still up after 6 minutes. Either we're inundating their censor bot, it's been shadowbanned, or Google has stopped under the flak. I'll keep checking later.
Try looking at your comment in an Incognito window and sort by new. You'll still see your own comment if you're logged in, but you won't see it otherwise. I just tried this.
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#563Here's my take on what's probably going on:
YouTube is a platform designed around showing video ads to targeted audiences. In order to show those ads they need to allow people to upload user generated content. This content needs to be 'brand safe', i.e. it cannot be content that advertisers don't want to be associated with.
'Content' is more than just the video itself, comments are part of this.
If an Easily Offended Entity, in this instance 'China', sees an ad from AdvertiserX appearing on content they deem offensive they can kick up a stink about this, this is especially true in China where nationalism is extremely strong. Western brands have a long history of apologising to China over minor things, they really cannot risk fervent nationalism from damaging their balance sheet either through boycotts or having authorities turning a blind eye to counterfeiting.
So YouTube will remove this content, not because they're under the thumb of China, but because advertisers call the shots.
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#564Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is the simple solution just "pretending"? What evidence is there that a complex solution exists or works? What is the basis of the assumption that good actors are not as effective as bad actors? Why has society not devolved into chaos if that's the case? How did this work before social media and online anonymity?
I would say it's pretending because it's not 100% certain to be the solution. As mentioned, the situation is incredibly complex and can't be properly argued in a one-liner. There is no evidence that a complex solution exists, but I would say it's better if you know you don't have the solution to imply uncertainty. Good actors are almost certainly more effective than bad actors. That's likely why the world hasn't devo…
> "Good actors are almost certainly more effective than bad actors."
By your own exposition, this is the simple and effective solution that's inline with what I stated. Let freedom reign because the good already solves for the bad, and has done so for the entirety of civilization. Do we really need more?
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#565Earlier quoted context omitted.
What were those clear rules we apparently abandoned for no reason?
The First Amendment of the US Constitution.
>>> The solution is to realize "hate speech" is mostly subjective and revert back to the clear rules that we had last decade before the current political climate of gratuitous outrage.
>> What were those clear rules we apparently abandoned for no reason?
> The First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Ah yes, the good old days when every newspaper was obligated to publish every letter to the editor and every citizen was required to reproduce and distribute pamphlets put out by every nut job they ran into on the street.
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#566Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where does it say that hate speech is about immutable characteristics? Is that your subjective personal definition? Advertisers really don't care that much (and I'm speaking as a 12 year adtech veteran). They play into popular culture and are being carried along with the increasingly sensitive social environment online. Also we're talking about comments, not video content, and it's futile to try and control how other…
Here's the first result from Googling "hate speech": > public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation I might broaden the final bit to "immutable characteristics" instead of the specific list they provide. For the same reason, I probably wouldn't consider the comment under discussion hate speech, but I'm really c…
Neither race, sex, religion or sexual orientation are "immutable characteristics". As proponents of "hate speech" teach us they are all social constructs. Moreoever, proponents of hate speech often wouldn't consider "punching up" as "hate speech".
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#567Earlier quoted context omitted.
Drew, ever since sourcehut got a little positive attention you seem to have adopted this mindset of " I started my own company and don't have to work for the man anymore, why doesn't everyone else just do the same?" You need to realize that this is an extremely narrow minded view to have. Not everyone can start their own business. What would you have done if sourcehut hadn't gained enough popularity to be successful?…
I am not relating the reader to my experience with SourceHut - I haven't told anyone to quit and start their own company rather than work for Google - but remininding them that the market for their talents is strong and that we have the luxury of choosing who we work for. I have held and spoken of these convictions since long before SourceHut. Read my blog archives or my old HN comments since pre-SourceHut and you'll…
> I haven't told anyone to quit and start their own company rather than work for Google
Your past comments and submissions to HN say otherwise. You have been very outspoken and proud about the fact that you haven't taken money from "the man" (my words, not yours), and that others should do the same [0][1]. Whether it be a VC or Google, your messaging is clear.
>Who is using SourceHut to build software I disagree with on ethical terms? I am not aware of such a project.
You're dodging the question. Have you done an audit on every single project hosted on SourceHut to see if you disagree with them? Would such an action even be something you agree with? What if someone was hosting such a repository (I'll go create one right now), would you remove it? But that is censorship, is it not? Do you even have the technical capability to do such an audit? If not, that means people could easily use your site for nefarious things, so how do you justify keeping it running?
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#568Google & YouTube employees on HN: how do you justify still working at this company? Enough of the cognitive dissonance. Face your choices and tell me how you square yourself with them. For shame.
- Not a google employee
- Am an employee of a large company whose practices would probably also not stand up to public scrutiny
First question is has this been verified beyond "someone said so"? Perhaps it has - but any search I do ultimately leads back to the same comment.
Second, google is hardly the only company to occasionally kowtow the the PRC. I don't think any large company wants to a face-off with them. Are there more ethical employers? Probably, but they're probably small and not everyone wants to work at a small company pace. Also, if the company got larger and push came to shove, I suspect they'd do what they needed to do to stay on China's good side. It's a better option than going under.
Really a lot of employers are ethically shaky.
- Is it better to work for the DoD? Some people say no.
- Is it better to work for a Big Bank? Some people say no.
- Is it better to work for Big Pharm? Some people say no.
- Is it better to work for a place that frankly abuses their warehouse workers? I think we've had that discussion.
I'm not sure where that leaves anyone who likes gainful employment, particularly outside the Silicon Valley startup culture.
That doesn't necessarily translate to 'throw up our hands' but it does meant a more nuanced approach to where we work, how we feel about our employer, and how we measure that against all the other places we do business with that also have their dark sides.
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#569There was a previous unrelated discussion about this just a few hours ago which was climbing to the top of the front page when I saw it. And then just vanished: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23221264 It's not flagged, it just went from #13 on the front page to invisible. In a single refresh. How does that work? Looking at the votes and age, it should be in the top 5 of both Ask and the front page. What's the m…
A few years ago, I reverse-engineered the HN ranking algorithm [1]. Basic ranking is based on votes vs age, but there are numerous other factors. Penalties are applied based on words in the title or the domain. Posts with too many comments got penalized as controversial. A "voting ring detector" triggers other automatic penalties. HN ranking has probably become more complex since I looked at it. Manual moderation als…
Good analysis, but - obviously - outdated and besides, the biggest input and wildcard is 'what are the penalties' and without knowing those the analysis is not super useful even if it is accurate to a rough approximation.
Keeping the spammers out is already quite a bit of work so I'm perfectly OK with the secret sauce staying secret.
Re: Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube
#570Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was flagged by users and set off the flamewar detector. We review those, but not while asleep. The site guidelines specifically ask you not to post like this, but to send such questions to hn@ycombinator.com instead. Would you please review them ( https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html )? The reason we ask that is that such comments routinely spark completely speculative subthreads that range from comple…
Hey, dang. I've sent a letter to hn@ycombinator.com 5 hours ago, questioning why my AskHN submission "Self-censorship on HN" has been flagged and blocked for further replies. Have you seen it by any chance? I'm really concerned about the issue. > Do you really think we're suppressing discussion of the suppression of the phrase "communist bandits" from YouTube? I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion…
I have not seen it yet. If you saw the inbox you'd understand why. I'll get to it as soon as I can.
Edit: One not-so-obvious reason why subthreads like this are so disastrous for HN is that they suck up all the moderation resources. I haven't had a chance to even look at the rest of the HN front page yet, let alone the emails.