member when youtube wasnt owned by google.
member when youtube wasnt owned by google.
So people are basically getting up in arms because Youtube is beginning to roll-out ML algorithms to help filter/flag content that might be offensive or against their ToS to both better improve their user/advertiser's experiences and avoid fines (such as the regulatory penalties levied against Facebook recently)?
- - - Updated - - -
You mean the one year gap from 2005-2006 in which they did not innovate, make any meaningful updates, and basically allowed the platform to stagnate with little support...?
Sylvanas didn't even win the popular vote, she was elected by an indirect election of representatives. #NotMyWarchief
Well this is what happens when the right wing becomes a haven for fanatics.
And yeah, the lefties are the violent ones. Unlike the right wing who simply tried to take over a wildlife refuge . . .
Go learn Django and JavaScript and build your own website if you don't like youtube so much. Oh wait, your side is trying to kill Net Neutrality which would make it near impossible for your own start ups to get a foot in the door.
Putin khuliyo
Do people really support Google using an AI to filter out things that it considers to be hate speech? Give that their Ai has ALWAYS been so exact, never once has it given out false DMCA or flagging videos for no reason? Or are those people just forgetful of the past and willfully ignorant.
No, it didn't.
Whatever else may be wrong with google they do a good job extracting quality content and giving it a shot against clickbait spam.
They also pay creators generally, albeit very very little, which is still more than before, which was nothing.
The original founders lucked out by exploiting the copyright laws so that they couldn't be held accountable for people mass uploading the Simpsons. They had no vision for the company at all.
This is something I often consider as well. Since we don't work with any anti-monopoly laws on the type of website available, gigantic ones like YouTube, Twitter, Facebook etc have entire markets cordoned off.
If we accept that the internet should be a public utility then should these sites to be under scrutiny of monopoly laws, which sounds like a fucking nightmare to work out, or perhaps they should be beholden to standardised regulation. But what regulation do we go with? YouTube, for example, is available in hundreds of countries all with varying laws that would affect it - which laws do we choose? Do we need a standardised law of the internet? How would that even work?
There's no simple solution in my eyes.
Last edited by Ryme; 2017-08-03 at 11:07 AM.
I am the lucid dream
Uulwi ifis halahs gag erh'ongg w'ssh
Intriguing thought process you have there. We can break this down to a more classical statistical learning application. Suppose you are looking for potential cancer patients. For the sake of the domain--for the sake of increasing the number of true positives, are you willing to increase the amount of false positives and amend classifications in the decision process?
You can take that and apply it to hate speech, terrorism, whatever. Realistic people would prefer not to die than to have a small distraction in their experience.
I didn't know how to say that without insulting you, so I put that qualifier. I'm sorry. I guess it didn't work. If you would like to explain why you disagree with what I'm saying I would find that interesting.
I suppose you could argue that you're paying with your view and look at views as a form of currency. But where the actual cash changes hands is between the two companies involved, not the user.
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlike...e_the_product/
Is this youtube machine learning the same kind of technology that spawned other AI softwares that had to be taken down within days because they became extremely radical from a human mentality stand-point. Just watch, within days youtube ai is going to rebrand the youtube site into some type of helicopter sliding scale gender based clown with 3 sets of reproductive organs including male, female, and horse.
I recall Barack Obama in a speech with Angela Merkel once said the Internet had become a "disruptive force" in the world. And that the implications of the speech were that the internet needed to become curated to ensure that it no longer disrupted.... well.... whatever Obama was implying it was disrupting.
I think this is the culmination of those words. Not that Obama and Merkel hatched some secret plot, but that "Power" has decided it needs to regain control over what people see, think and here, and thus controlling and censoring the internet via vast monopolies is favorable. Dissenting voices are simply disruptive to their progressive narrative view of the world, it disturbs their comforting "Arc of History."
On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.
Merkel said that, not Obama, and if you actually read what she said, she was comparing the internet to things like the printing press where it was a transformational invention that society struggled with handling what they can, should, and should not do.
And that likely is translated from German, which whatever word was translated to disrupted may or may not have the same nuance in English.
Last edited by Noxx79; 2017-08-03 at 03:19 PM.
More aptly, States and what one could nebulously call "Power" struggled to deal with the sudden free flow of information as either new classes gained access to information or the ability to spread their messages and counter-signal the prevailing narrative most comfortable to that "Power". Merkel's suggestion is a nice coating on that same complaint, she recognizes the internet counter-signals against the narrative that would be most amicable to what she and other members of the ruling classes wish to do.
On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.
It sets an unhealthy precedent if corporations can have the power to remove trains of thought from the internet on a giant like Youtube.
Speaking of thoughts, here's one.
If youtube's going in "full thought police" mode, then what in the world is MMO-C?