71–80 of 88 posts
Full documentary is free to watch by the creators themselves https://vimeo.com/213152344
I hope the take-away that comes out of the leaked documents is this: community moderation is very, very hard . It's not just a simple cut-and-dry "free speech vs censorship" issue. There's an enormous amount of nuance involved to sustain a community that won't just devolve into a toxic waste dump that's poison for 99% of the people there. In my experience working with startups, many of them don't treat their content…
> There's an enormous amount of nuance involved to sustain a community that won't just devolve into a toxic waste dump that's poison for 99% of the people there. Is it? I always admired the much-scoffed YouTube as the free-est place to talk on the internet. Where a vegan gay liberal from NY can discuss on the same video with a neo-con Mongolian and a 15-year old hipster from Sweden, an Israeli Jew, an Arab, and a bla…
Freedom of speech is great, and important. That doesn't mean that there's any value in just anybody exploring the boundaries of it.
I'm more surprised that they haven't moved to Machine Learning yet.
The cult around ML here is pretty amusing. As another poster said, AI is currently staggeringly bad at this task, and I'm not sure it's going to be good enough in the near future either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's an enormous amount of nuance involved to sustain a community that won't just devolve into a toxic waste dump that's poison for 99% of the people there. Is it? I always admired the much-scoffed YouTube as the free-est place to talk on the internet. Where a vegan gay liberal from NY can discuss on the same video with a neo-con Mongolian and a 15-year old hipster from Sweden, an Israeli Jew, an Arab, and a bla…
That's probably a good example of why "freedom" isn't the right way to measure a community's value. Because the entirety of all youtube comments' value can only be measured in what worse things they authors were prevented from doing while commenting there. Freedom of speech is great, and important. That doesn't mean that there's any value in just anybody exploring the boundaries of it.
This says more about your sampling bias than youtube itself.
And the fact you are posting this says more about the magnitude of your political bias (its exact direction being yet tbd) than anything you read. I'm not sure if you realize how many nuts really say what they believe and believe what they say.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you actually use 4chan? There's more than /b/ and /pol/. Most of the boards have a topic and off-topic posts are removed by janitors.
Here's a pretty typical /a/ post: http://i.imgur.com/zAoDHlT.png It's true that off-topic posts are removed, but I'm mainly curious why this kind of "say whatever you want" attitude is so pervasive on 4chan yet doesn't kill the site. On Reddit, for example, comments like that would be moderated via downvoting, which physically hides the comment unless the user clicks on it. That's still a form of moderation.
I don't hang out on chans but sometimes end up reading them for various reasons.
I think the constant noise and random insults actually are moderation: they keep away people prone to butthurt, who due to their stubbornness and obnoxity are absolutely the worst fun killers and threat to any discussion. Normally people call each other retards as a matter of course and don't give much fuck, but if you try to argue emotionally then you are flamed to the death.
To me it was quite eye opening to read a bit of Encyclopedia Dramatica once. Many times I saw it throw shit all over some people or idea just to click on the "see also: some ostensibly opposite idea" link at the bottom and see them throw shit all over that one too. That's a very simple and elegant solution to tribalism if you ask me, HN totally could take inspiration from them because the mods keep complaining about tribalism here :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most (≈99.99%?) death threats aren't at all serious.
Every death threat is serious. Not many result in death, but that's not how we define serious is it? More importantly, I can't come up with a reasonable argument that it's ever constructive to the conversation to be allowed to threaten someone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Listen. I used the phone since 40 years. With the phone I had conversations with people that could have, well, annoyed others to say the least. I've said super bad things with my phone. Was I moderated ? No. Was it a problem ? No. Moderating is just here to make sure that FaceBook can still operate. That's just a problem for FaceBook to protect its image. Let's imagine that there is no moderation. What will happen ?…
Why do you think getting the police involved all the time would be better? They only have limited capacity; do you think they really want to look at every flagged post? Moderators do refer the most serious cases to the police. But there's a lot of crap that falls short of that, so milder penalties work better.
You actually understood me very well. That's my secret point. I don't see why FB must do better than police. If someone insults me, then, well, I fight back, go to the police, prosecute, etc. That works well because there is the work of justice.
By displacing the problem out of FB into the realm of justice, I want to make two points :
1/ The social norm of what is acceptable or not acceptable speech is governed by the people, not by a single entity.
2/ If there are too many cases to handle for the judge, then, let's add more judges (in my country, justice department is starving for budgets).
FB has way too much power, that's its (totally fair) success but now, it's too big to be let alone.
I'm more surprised that they haven't moved to Machine Learning yet.
The cult around ML here is pretty amusing. As another poster said, AI is currently staggeringly bad at this task, and I'm not sure it's going to be good enough in the near future either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought 4chan was the largest forum on the Internet, and in fact I remember when 4chan displayed the total amount of live content on their servers as being 100GB. Now it's more than 1300GB. 4chan thus seems to have become more popular. People really do hang out on 4chan, though it's lost some share recently to 8chan, but 4chan is certainly a very large forum, the 200k+ current users, as displayed on their homepage…
I meant compared to the really large scale social networks. I don't know how accurate this is, but to put some numbers on it, Reddit seems to be #9 and Twitter #11 according to Alexa [1] and 4chan is rated much lower [2]. Although, Hacker News ranks higher than I expected [3], which seems suspicious. Perhaps there's a better way to measure it? [1] http://www.alexa.com/topsites [2] http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/4chan.…