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

Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 187 posts

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#71

Post by glasz »

DuskStar wrote: post #18

"Third, we will be taking a tougher stance on videos that do not clearly violate our policies — for example, videos that contain inflammatory religious or supremacist content. In future these will appear behind an interstitial warning and they will not be monetised, recommended or eligible for comments or user endorsements. That means these videos will have less engagement and be harder to find. We think this strikes…

already happening with alternative media. also, anti "hatespeech" laws are being passed while the term isnt even defined.

the establishment and left extremism figured out that the internet as the greatest platform for real free speech undermines their prerogativd of interpretation in the public.

this is a fight to control public opinion and we will lose it when we continue to be jelly fish.

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#72

Post by coolgeek »

DuskStar wrote: post #18

"Third, we will be taking a tougher stance on videos that do not clearly violate our policies — for example, videos that contain inflammatory religious or supremacist content. In future these will appear behind an interstitial warning and they will not be monetised, recommended or eligible for comments or user endorsements. That means these videos will have less engagement and be harder to find. We think this strikes…

> for example, videos that contain inflammatory religious or supremacist content.

Why does that trigger concerns for you about 'political content'?

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#73

Post by bandushrew »

avip wrote: post #19
jscott0918 wrote: post #17

This is a terrifying step for the internet. These kinds of step lay the groundwork for censorship but fail to consider the impact of these changes in the event that the bad guys come into power or gain influence of these management systems.

It's less "terrifying" than the current alternative, where people can openly support various forms of extreme violence, get away with it, and monetize on the way. Mind you this "internet" is private biz. This is a pretty obvious "don't vomit on my rug" case. Don't like it? Find another party.

I really don't care if people "support" various forms of extreme violence by watching youtube movies. That is WAY better than supporting it by committing various forms of extreme violence.

Is there any actual evidence that these youtube videos are in fact driving people to commit acts of terrorism?

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#74

Post by monk_e_boy »

jscott0918 wrote: post #17

This is a terrifying step for the internet. These kinds of step lay the groundwork for censorship but fail to consider the impact of these changes in the event that the bad guys come into power or gain influence of these management systems.

As this technology gets more widespread, each nation will have a different set of rules of what people can and can not see.

The internet bubbles will get worse.

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#75

Post by AlphaWeaver »

novia wrote: post #44
AlphaWeaver wrote: post #15

Interesting that they didn't address specific steps they'd take to protect their content reviewing teams... Sounds like it would be appreciated, especially in the context of the recent issue at Facebook.

especially in the context of the recent issue at Facebook. I'm possibly out of the loop, what happened at facebook? Are you talking about the fake news fiasco?

In short, Facebook accidentally revealed the identities of the moderators responsible for taking down stories related to terrorism, to potential terrorists. The HN story is here. [0]

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14572585

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#76

Post by Pinckney »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #20
dcow wrote: post #12

I am vehemently opposed to babysitting society, but violence is not speech, it's action. That much seems fair. I do worry about step 3. It sounds like that's going to silence a lot of minority opinions or screw over groups who post no-so-liberal commentary videos etc. Anything hiding behind an interstitial is just crackpot conspiracy theory.. Google is a negative influence on society bleep. Zap.

It's surely better than the current situation of literal neo-Nazis openly talking on YouTube about “white genocide” and how the “Jewish question” must be “solved”, without Google seemingly so much as batting an eyelid.

They'll just move to another platform. If Google banning such content is good, isn't passing laws to require websites to ban such content better?

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#77

Post by Jarwain »

blfr wrote: post #41

I don't believe that there is a problem with terrorism online or that such a thing as online terror exists. Only the most feeble can be terrorised through the screen. The problem is that there are terrorists among us who are willing to bomb, stab, or run people down with a truck. That there are entire communities where this either receives support or is at least tolerated. It has very little to do with technology. Th…

I wouldn't say that it's about individuals being terrorized through the screen. I'd say that it's at-risk individuals who are persuaded to radicalize through the internet. By at-risk, I refer to individuals who may be suffering personal issues in their life, and are susceptible to the messaging used by terrorist recruiters.

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#78

Post by monk_e_boy »

mythrwy wrote: post #32
jscott0918 wrote: post #17

This is a terrifying step for the internet. These kinds of step lay the groundwork for censorship but fail to consider the impact of these changes in the event that the bad guys come into power or gain influence of these management systems.

Why is it terrifying for the "internet"? It's an action by Google, not the internet. If Google is the "internet" then maybe they shouldn't be. There isn't anything stopping folks from setting up alternative video hosting/social network sites.

There's nothing stopping you setting up your own TV station or newspaper or search engine.

Just the billions of dollars and thousands of talented staff.

So, yeah, for 99.999% of people it is impossible.

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#79

Post by codedokode »

bandushrew wrote: post #73
avip wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's less "terrifying" than the current alternative, where people can openly support various forms of extreme violence, get away with it, and monetize on the way. Mind you this "internet" is private biz. This is a pretty obvious "don't vomit on my rug" case. Don't like it? Find another party.

I really don't care if people "support" various forms of extreme violence by watching youtube movies. That is WAY better than supporting it by committing various forms of extreme violence. Is there any actual evidence that these youtube videos are in fact driving people to commit acts of terrorism?

Why then are they posted?

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#80

Post by novia »

AlphaWeaver wrote: post #75
novia wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

especially in the context of the recent issue at Facebook. I'm possibly out of the loop, what happened at facebook? Are you talking about the fake news fiasco?

In short, Facebook accidentally revealed the identities of the moderators responsible for taking down stories related to terrorism, to potential terrorists. The HN story is here. [0] [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14572585

Wow.. the real-name policy at work.
Post reply on HN