Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Master_Scythe

Youtube disables COMMENTS on any video with kids in it

Recommended Posts

For those who missed the story;

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/02/youtube-will-fight-predatory-behavior-by-disabling-comments-on-videos-of-minors/

Basically, specific search terms would lead to nasty videos, and bad people.
Welcome to the horrible side of the internet.

Now, while I applaud their 'fast action' on this matter.... this is GOOGLE we're talking about here.
Mr A.I, the big data mining giant of the west.

Surely, there is some child safe, weapon safe, link blocking, spam banning algorithm they could have used instead?
OK, there is literally no reason that grandmas video of her kids should be 'published' and not a private link, but literally millions of videos have been 'silenced'.

In the Tech World, we have Linus Tech Tips, who has his kids in TONS of videos helping out.
Now silenced from comments.

Really, it's not a big blow to the online world, forums, discord, facebook and the like still work, and A+ for stopping the bad people in the short term;
But I'm really surprised this broad of a brush stroke was required.

You'd think that someone with their power could do something other than just "Shut it (comments) down!"
No?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH, I don't mind too much. Facebook and other sites still allow kids pics / stories, etc. yes ? I have been known to laugh at some of the funny clips out there, and also be horrified by what others might put up for viewing. 

Then too, I'm rather glad internet was not around during my childhood. Anything that is out there about me, I am of an age to have known better ... what hope does a young kid have, if their embarrassments are all out there ? 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a broad brush stroke as a first up measure then gives them time to come up with something better afterwards. I'd rather that than wait for them to spend 6 months formulating a policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See, now I didn't open the OP link, and I''ve just read the title properly.

Only the comments gone . No probs then 😉

/as per usual, disregard my earlier post. Cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, fliptopia said:

I think a broad brush stroke as a first up measure then gives them time to come up with something better afterwards. I'd rather that than wait for them to spend 6 months formulating a policy.

Thing is though, I think you and I could come up with a good solution in a month or so.

We're talking over 62 thousand staff at their disposal.
I just thought, especially for content creators with sponsors and such, that it was very broad.

Linus (LTT) having his kid help build a PC that was sponsored by INTEL, is at a very low risk of those predators (I'd hope).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more people you have for input the longer it takes to wade through the possible ideas. You'll have the right idea quickly but then you have to find it. Big companies can move slowly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Master_Scythe said:

Thing is though, I think you and I could come up with a good solution in a month or so.

We're talking over 62 thousand staff at their disposal.

a month or so sounds seriously ambitious to me.  i mean, this is proper too hard basket territory! 

i am not sure what would incur the greater time and money cost, actually determining where 'the line' should be drawn as it applies to millions of permutations of slightly different cases, or, having decided on an algorithm, actually committing the resources to implement and maintain it.  

no doubt there's x amount of nefarious YT channels and comments that could/should be removed/prevented through more proactive automatic filtering — greatly enhanced by cutting edge machine learning, for example.  but then you have something like people determined to post pervy time-stamps, who one expects would soon find ways to circumvent any and all automatic processes, leading to the probable necessity of large scale active human monitoring. 

pervs aside, it is often unsettling to see people commenting on children in YT videos.  sometimes they are ridiculed, even if most often the comments are innocent.  but in any case, i often wonder about their rights, or lack of, to have opted out of this degree of public exposure.  i dont know, it does seem that privacy is dead and the whole world has gone mad, but i am often happy to see "comments have been disabled for this video" when it appears to motivated by a concern for welfare.

i do feel sorry for the many good people whose business models and livelihoods will be adversely effected by Google opting for such a blunt instrument, but if it remains this way going forward, i think it can be adapted to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, @~thehung said:

a month or so sounds seriously ambitious to me.  i mean, this is proper too hard basket territory! 

i am not sure what would incur the greater time and money cost, actually determining where 'the line' should be drawn as it applies to millions of permutations of slightly different cases, or, having decided on an algorithm, actually committing the resources to implement and maintain it.

Lets see; taking into account what we know of googles AI filtering (so knowing how lax we can be with our definitions), I'd start with:

 

Block all direct URL's

Block known workarounds (at) (dot) (htt//) etc.

Block hate speech.

Block swear words.

Block repeat identical comments.

Block 'sexual' terms.

Block phrases that result in "flesh tone" being the primary result - (Chat Roulette does this to stop 'shock dick pics' streamers)

 

The point here is that google isn't the police.
As a company the need to be seen doing something to help fight against the sickos.
And that ^ would be something.

Blanket Banning, retroactively,  pre-existing, non-sexual content, seems to be to just be the most lazy approach they could have ever taken!
I mean hell, "Smart Search" while not perfect already knows how to filter images, text AND video outcomes; they'd already have one HELL of a mature algorithm to build from.

 

Don't get me wrong please, I'm glad to see they did something.
I just really hate seeing 'praise' or even acceptance when a company that mines so much data, has so much power, wealth, and influence can 'get away' with doing literally the bare minimum; almost less than 😛
The answer to a broken something, isn't to throw away the something. That's disposal, not 'fixing'.

They make millions off of their content creators videos, last thing they need is to start blanket silencing what could be required 'pinned' comments for Sponsors, 'How-To', or Educational videos, just because the "algorithm" happened to notice a kid walk past in the background.
It's lazy!

Quote

i think it can be adapted to.


I'd hate to have a popular video 'locked down' because some parent walks behind me for 2 seconds while vlogging; it's ludicrous; at least... IMO.

I mean you could spend hours masking your video to hide pedestrians, then all you need is Andy Milonakis to walk past, and your video is flagged anyway!

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Master_Scythe said:

I'd hate to have a popular video 'locked down' because some parent walks behind me for 2 seconds while vlogging; it's ludicrous; at least... IMO.

I mean you could spend hours masking your video to hide pedestrians, then all you need is Andy Milonakis to walk past, and your video is flagged anyway!

Well you could argue that you are also publicly showing all those people in your video without proper consent. Maybe don't vlog with bystanders? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Master_Scythe said:

Block all direct URL's
Block known workarounds (at) (dot) (htt//) etc.
Block hate speech.
Block swear words.
Block repeat identical comments.
Block 'sexual' terms.
Block phrases that result in "flesh tone" being the primary result - (Chat Roulette does this to stop 'shock dick pics' streamers)

but theres multitudes of exceptions and false positives posed by the need to categorically define just about everything in that list.  so this can read like a blueprint for just another set of blunt instruments.  welcome to the problematic dichotomies of horseshoe theory :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, @~thehung said:

but theres multitudes of exceptions and false positives posed by the need to categorically define just about everything in that list.  so this can read like a blueprint for just another set of blunt instruments. 

No argument, however it's much LESS blunt, and false positives are preferable to zero chance.

Think of it like a virus scanner;
Would you prefer zero files, because we just disabled your ability to download altogether?
Or would you prefer 75% of your files, because we tried to filter and sure, got some wrong.

I don't know about you, but 75% of my files (or in this case, comments) sounds a lot nicer than 0%.

It's not the blunt strike that bothers me, its the size of the instrument.
You don't need to blow up a planet to kill an ant; or even an ants nest.

9 minutes ago, fliptopia said:

Well you could argue that you are also publicly showing all those people in your video without proper consent. Maybe don't vlog with bystanders? 

You don't need it, if it's in a public space.
I'm a little involved with the legals of that topic with my workplace.

the tldr of it all, is that if you could reasonably be expected that you MIGHT be caught on camera, then you legally can be.
At least in most countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, @~thehung said:

i dont know, it does seem that privacy is dead and the whole world has gone mad, but i am often happy to see "comments have been disabled for this video" when it appears to motivated by a concern for welfare. 

Yep. Agree.

Privacy is dead. I found myself in a situ the other day where by a person was filming me whilst I was conversing with their relations ... I could I suppose have asked them to stop, but I didn't want to interrupt or kill the mood.
... but I'm an adult. I sorta think kids should be off limits ... but then kids film their peers ... so with that I think to just kill all the comments seems like a fine plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what problem this is supposed to be solving? 

...And if Google wanted to do something with YouTube to improve kids' welfare... 

I mean come on, that's a messed-up ocean of nasty shit sloshing around. Boggles the mind, what effect it's going to have long-term... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Kimmo said:

I'm not sure what problem this is supposed to be solving?  

I actually thought the tried and tested 'skin tone filter' (which I know is unreliable for people of extreme skin tones; from albino to black) would have been something to apply.
eg. This search term shows majority skin tone, and majority kids, flag it for review\filtering\block.

As I said, youtube isn't the police; the police are the police and need to hunt the ring of criminals asap to protect the kids.
Youtube's responsibility imo, was to stop the 'collections' from showing up and feeding these people.

IMO all this has done is cripple the platform; there's hundreds of text mediums sickos could chat on, and youtube can still be the final destination.
This is why I don't criticize their want to do something, more power to them; but I DO call it the most lazy possible outcome.

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/03/2019 at 9:22 AM, Master_Scythe said:

Thing is though, I think you and I could come up with a good solution in a month or so.

We're talking over 62 thousand staff at their disposal.

You'd think with over 62 thousand staff they'd be able to release and stick to one messaging client and one music client and etc and etc (and a way for pixel phone hotspots to not keep dropping connections) and etc, but I mean hey

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will have unforeseen consequences. The YouTube comments section is precisely where we want to keep these people - shutting that down may cause them to venture outside, into public spaces, to mingle with common society. Nobody wants to meet a YouTube commenter in real life. Nobody.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, i_am_banned2 said:

This will have unforeseen consequences. The YouTube comments section is precisely where we want to keep these people - shutting that down may cause them to venture outside, into public spaces, to mingle with common society. Nobody wants to meet a YouTube commenter in real life. Nobody.

There are plenty of YT commenters that offer sensible comment.  There's just a fucking amazing number of complete bloody morons who yell nonsense and profanity as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×