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

91–100 of 187 posts

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

#91

Post by akerro »

Buge wrote: post #48
theparanoid wrote: post #8

Hello Big Brother.

Do Hacker News moderators count as Big Brother? An website can decide how it wants to moderate itself.

Google said they will cooperate with governments and 3rd party organisations, which means they will have a voice on what government 'thinks' is good or bad and they will use that power to impact our political-social-legal regulations and standards in a way google sees it. At some point AI created and provided by google will be creating law and regulations in some cities or states...

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

#92

Post by 3131s »

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.

Violence is not speech, but are images of violence speech?

I am more worried about Google than ISIS. Real terrorists are people like Eric Schmidt who cozy up to the DoD.

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

#93

Post by 3131s »

bamboozled wrote: post #56

I truly hope these changes will include the US and Allied forces combat footage. I've seen videos on YouTube contain some of the most shockingly needless violence with complimentary cheering and derogatory language used by British and US soldiers (often directed towards foreign people) one can imagine, disturbing. It seemed like footage aimed at radicalising people to me.

Do you mean to say that the footage should be censored? I think their crimes should be seen be all.

A better stop-gap measure against the radicalization of American terrorists would be to prevent the DoD from recruiting at high schools, at sporting events, in movies and video games, etc.

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

#95

Post by matt4077 »

nabla9 wrote: post #29

In the west terrorism works trough media exposure. Fighting it in media is good strategy. Violence itself is ridiculously low volume per capita. If traditional media would step in, it would be major win. Instead of having symbiotic relationship with terrorism, where they hype up the terror, they could stick to reporting the facts and situation and not providing non-stop terror-porn entertainment to audience. Once peo…

I don't agree that traditional media outlets "hype up the terror". If you compare the coverage of, for example, the recent attacks in London and the fire you're referring to, they seemed to get about equal billing.

On the smaller scale, violence will get more prominent coverage, yes. But that's just a reflection of public interest, and how much intent makes a subjective difference. News outlets like the BBC or the Guardian seem to be far away from "terror porn", and in the case of the BBC, it's obviously wrong to suggest they're doing it for money, seeing as they're not financed by ads.

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

#96

Post by wiz21c »

From YouTube Hero's Program rules :

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7159025

>>> Participation in the Program by some participants may be restricted (e.g., no or limited perks), including persons who are government officials, including (i) government employees; (ii) candidates for public office; and (iii) employees of government-owned or government-controlled companies, public international organizations, and political parties.

that tells much...

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

#97

Post by randyrand »

sidcool wrote: post #86
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…

I feel it's next to impossible to apply this objectively

doesnt seem like they want to try to be anyway

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

#98

Post by [deleted] »

nippples wrote: post #90

> We have also recently committed to working with industry colleagues—including Facebook, Microsoft, and Twitter All of those platforms that are notoriously bad at curbing terrorism and great at promoting the most asinine "I can't believe it's not a troll" social justice concerns. Also, not to mention present day Twitter gets a lot of money from wahabbi-funding Saudi Royals: https://qz.com/131532/meet-the-people-and-…

[deleted]

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

#99

Post by zamalek »

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…

That's why we classically had the Supreme Court to deal with this stuff. Sadly it do not scale.

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

#100

Post by dredmorbius »

novia wrote: post #80
AlphaWeaver wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So to speak, yes.
Post reply on HN