Re:YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on...
by kelnos on Wednesday April 14, 2021 @05:50PM
(#26813554)
I would accept that Google will sometimes make the wrong decision, but it's unacceptable that the care given toward making that decision stops at a low-wage worker in another country spending 20 seconds on the decision.
There's a very wide chasm between "an AI decided" or "someone spent 20 seconds on it", and "we hired an expert in every possible field and they thoroughly research the facts at hand before making a decision".
The latter is obviously not feasible, but there are many options in between that will give markedly better outcomes than the status quo while not making YT moderation economically infeasible.
Re:YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on...
by hervature on Wednesday April 14, 2021 @04:22PM
(#26812536)
There are plenty of cases where I disagree with the outcome of companies I interact with. When I spend 30 minutes chatting with an agent via text with Amazon or airlines, I might leave the conversation disappointed, but I never doubt their conscientiousness. I highly doubt United beat me at the Turing Test.
Re:YouTube suspends account for linking to a PhD research on...
by tremon on Wednesday April 14, 2021 @05:21PM
(#26813269)
Google makes what I consider to be the correct decision in this case.
I'll settle for "Google makes a well-informed decision and will communicate the weighted pros and cons that led to that decision."
The point is that involving more humans in the moderation decisions at YouTube does not guarantee nor is there any evidence to suggest, that it would result in better moderation.
Somebody with the technical and industry knowledge to know that talking about security vulnerabilities like this shouldn't be removed can probably find a better job that YouTube video moderation.