惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

博客园 - Franky
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
aimingoo的专栏
aimingoo的专栏
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
L
LangChain Blog
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
Microsoft Azure Blog
Microsoft Azure Blog
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
T
The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
G
Google Developers Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
Y
Y Combinator Blog
D
DataBreaches.Net
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
MyScale Blog
MyScale Blog
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
The GitHub Blog
The GitHub Blog
Recent Announcements
Recent Announcements

Lauren Weinstein's Blog

Big Tech’s Catastrophic Layoffs Frenzy – Lauren Weinstein's Blog The Rise of AI Slop on Google’s YouTube – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Why Google Search AI Overviews Are a “Misinformation Machine” – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Why Apple’s New “MacBook Neo” Has Stunned the Tech World – Lauren Weinstein's Blog When Data Centers Destroy Communities – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Why You Shouldn’t Use Google’s Chrome “Auto Browse” Agentic AI, or Any Other Agentic AI From Other Firms – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Why Proposed “Blocking Technologies” for 3D Printers Are a Terrible Idea – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Cheerful, Cooperative, and Usually, Wrong. – Lauren Weinstein's Blog The World Gets an Important New Drone That Can Save Lives — But Thanks to Our Politicians Not in the USA – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Separating the Chrome Browser From Google Could Be Terrible for Billions of Users – Lauren Weinstein's Blog In the War Between the Federal Government and States Against Drone Maker DJI, Americans Are at Risk – Lauren Weinstein's Blog The Website Age Verification Train Wreck – Lauren Weinstein's Blog How the U.S. Is Losing Its Lead in Technology and Science Research – Lauren Weinstein's Blog The Enormous Negative Impacts of the New Tariffs on the Technology Sector – Lauren Weinstein's Blog DOGE Is Destroying Social Security, and Seniors Are Already at Risk – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Time To Change Section 230? – Lauren Weinstein's Blog The Helpful Google Ombudsman (Who Doesn’t Exist) – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Commerce Department Proposes Yet Another Insane Chinese Drone Ban That Could Cost Lives – Lauren Weinstein's Blog AI Is Dooming Google, but Not in the Way Its CEO Believes – Lauren Weinstein's Blog [What say you, Spock?] My Proposed Terminology to Describe Bypassing Social Media Face ID Age Verification Systems – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Drone Hysteria and Bans Put Lives at Risk – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Australia’s Under-16 Social Media Ban Is Doomed – Lauren Weinstein's Blog DOJ’s Proposed Antitrust “Remedies” Against Google Would Be a Disaster – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Users have the most to lose – Lauren Weinstein's Blog “I Am the Very Model of a Google AI Overview” – Lauren Weinstein's Blog What Google Should Do About Their Search Generative AI Overview Answers – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Generative AI Is Being Rammed Down Our Throats – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Evil – Lauren Weinstein's Blog The Nightmare of Google Account Recovery Failures – Lauren Weinstein's Blog Google and Seniors – Lauren Weinstein's Blog
As Google’s YouTube Battles Evil, YouTube Creators Are at...
2019-02-24 · via Lauren Weinstein's Blog

UPDATE (February 28, 2019): More updates on our actions related to the safety of minors on YouTube

 – – –

For vast numbers of persons around the globe, YouTube represents one of the three foundational “must have” aspects of a core Google services triad, with the other two being Google Search and Gmail. There are many other Google services of course, but these three are central to most of our lives, and I’d bet that for many users of these services the loss of YouTube would be felt even more deeply than the loss of either or both of the other two!

The assertion that a video service would mean so much to so many people might seem odd in some respects, but on reflection it’s notable that YouTube very much represents the Internet — and our lives — in a kind of microcosm.

YouTube is search, it’s entertainment, it’s education. YouTube is emotion, nostalgia, and music. YouTube is news, and community, and … well the list is almost literally endless.

And the operations of YouTube encompass a long list of complicated and controversial issues also affecting the rest of the Internet — decisions regarding content, copyright, fair use, monetization and ads, access and appeals, and … yet another very long list.

YouTube’s scope in terms of numbers of videos and amounts of Internet traffic is vast beyond the imagination of any mere mortal beings, with the exception of Googlers like the YouTube SREs themselves who keep the wheels spinning for the entire massive mechanism.

In the process of growing from a single short video about elephants at the zoo (more about that 2005 video in a moment) into a service that I personally can’t imagine living without, YouTube has increasingly intersected with the entire array of human social issues, from the most beatific, wondrous, and sublime — to the most crass, horrific, and evil.

I’ve discussed all of these aspects of YouTube — and my both positive and negative critiques regarding how Google has dealt with them over time — in numerous past posts over the years. I won’t even bother listing them here — they’re easy to find via search.

I will note again though that — especially of late — Google has become very serious about dealing with inappropriate content on YouTube, including taking some steps that I and others have long been calling for, such as removal of dangerous “prank and dare” videos, demonetization and general form de-recommendation of false “conspiracy” videos, and just announced, demonetization and other utterly appropriate actions against dangerous “anti-vaccine” (aka “anti-vaxx”) videos. 

This must be an even more intense time than usual for the YouTube policy folks up in San Bruno at YouTube HQ — because over the last few days yet another massive controversy regarding YouTube has erupted, this time one that has been bubbling under the surface for a long time, and suddenly burst forth dramatically and rather confusingly as well, involving the “hijacking” of innocent YouTube videos’ comments by pedophiles.

YouTube comments are a fascinating example of often stark contrasts in action. Many YouTube viewers just watch the videos and ignore comments completely. Other viewers consider the comments to be at least as important as the videos themselves. Many YouTube uploaders — I’ll refer to them as creators going forward in this post — are effectively oblivious to comments even on their own videos — which, given that the default setting for YouTube videos is to permit comments without any moderation — has become an increasingly problematic issue.

My own policy (started as soon as the functionality to do so became available) has always been to set my own YouTube videos to “moderated” mode — I must approve individual comments before they can appear publicly. But that takes considerable work, even with relatively low viewership videos like mine. Most YouTube creators likely never change the default comments setting, so comments of all sorts can appear and accumulate largely unnoticed by most creators.

In fact, a few minutes ago when I took another look at that first YouTube video (“Me at the zoo”) to make sure that I had the date correct, I noticed that it now has (as I type this) about 1.64 million comments. Every 5 or 10 seconds a new comment pops up on there, virtually all of them either requests for viewers to subscribe to other YouTube channels, or various kinds of more traditional spams and scams.

Obviously, nobody is curating the comments on this historic video. And this is the same kind of situation that has led to the new controversy about pedophiles establishing a virtual “comments network” of innocent videos involving children. It’s safe to assume that the creators of those videos haven’t been paying attention to the evil comments accumulating on those videos, or might not even know how to remove or otherwise control them.

There have already been a bunch of rather wild claims made about this situation. Some have argued that YouTube’s suggestion engine is at fault for suggesting more similar videos that have then in turn had their own comments subverted. I disagree. The suggestion algorithm is merely recommending more innocent videos of the same type. These videos are not themselves at fault, the commenters are the problem. In fact, if YouTube videos didn’t have comments at all, evil persons could simply create comments on other (non-Google) sites that provided links to specific YouTube videos. 

It’s easy for some to suggest simply banning or massively restricting the use of comments on YouTube videos as a “quick fix” for this dilemma. But that would drastically curtail the usefulness of many righteous videos.

I’ve seen YouTube entertainment videos with fascinating comment threads from persons who worked on historic movies and television programs or were related to such persons. For “how-to” videos on YouTube — one of the most important and valuable categories of videos as far as I’m concerned — the comment threads often add enormous value to the videos themselves, as viewers interact about the videos and describe their own related ideas and experiences. The same can be said for many other categories of YouTube videos as well — comments can be part and parcel of what makes YouTube wonderful.

To deal with the current, highly publicized crisis involving comment abuse — which has seen some major advertisers pulling their ads from YouTube as a result — Google has been disabling comments on large numbers of videos, and is warning that if comments are turned back on by these video creators and comment abuse occurs again, demonetization and perhaps other actions against those videos may occur.

The result is an enormously complex situation, given that in this context we are talking almost entirely about innocent videos where the creators are themselves the victims of comment abuse, not the perpetrators of abuse.

While I’d anticipate that Google is working on methods to algorithmically better filter comments at scale to try help avoid these comment abuses going forward, this still likely creates a situation where comment abuse could in many cases be “weaponized” to target innocent individual YouTube creators and videos, to try trigger YouTube enforcement actions against those innocent parties.

This could easily create a terrible kind of Hobson’s choice. For safety’s sake, these innocent creators may be forced to disable comments completely, in the process eliminating much of the value of their videos to their viewers. On the other hand, many creators of high viewership videos simply don’t have the time or other resources to individually moderate every comment before it appears.

A significant restructuring of the YouTube comments ecosystem may be in order, to permit the valuable aspects of comments to continue on legitimate videos, while still reducing the probabilities of comment abuse as much as possible. 

Perhaps it might be necessary to consider the permanent changing of the default comments settings away from “allowed” — to either “not allowed” or “moderated” — for new uploads (at least for certain categories of videos), especially for new YouTube creators. But given that so many creators never change the defaults, the ultimate ramifications and possible unintended negative consequences of such a significant policy alteration appear difficult to predict. 

Improved tools to aid creators in moderating comments on high viewership videos would also seem to be in focus — perhaps by leveraging third-party services or trusted viewer communities.

There are a variety of other possible approaches as well.

It appears certain that both YouTube itself and YouTube creators have reached a critical crossroads, a junction that successfully navigating will likely require some significant changes going forward, if the greatness of YouTube and its vast positive possibilities for creators are to be maintained or grow.

–Lauren–