Slashdot Mirror
A Proposal For Dealing With Terrorist Videos On the Internet (vortex.com)
Lauren Weinstein writes: Recent claims by some (mostly nontechnical) observers that it would be "simple" for services like YouTube to automatically block "terrorist" videos, in the manner that various major services currently detect child porn images are nonsensical. One major difference is that those still images are detected via data "fingerprinting" techniques that are relatively effective on known still images compared against a known database, but are relatively useless outside the realm of still images, especially for videos of varied origins that are routinely manipulated by uploaders specifically to avoid detection. Two completely different worlds. So are there practical ways to at least help to limit the worst of the violent videos, the ones that most directly portray, promote, and incite terrorism or other violent acts? I believe there are.
we the people? divvy us up, (religion, culture, even by ?color?)? 'trade' (gamble) in our futures (of scheduled 'shortages', debt slavery, violent conflict, punishment etc..)? demonish our everlasting spirits with multi-faceted abuse institutions until we become the perfect crusaders both suicidal & homicidal at once even towards each other? yikes? good thing it's primarily a wmd on credit cabal media facade? the corepirate nazi crown royal mutants (damaged spirits) cannot even wipe themselves properly without the constant assistance of us unchosens? truth+mercy=justice, choose the pain for others that we would really ask for ourselves? takes the fear & loathing features out of the process? in the moms we trust,, check us out? https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=truth+about+US ..the hymenless monkeys feel sorry for us? times to tahrir squared epic story of billions freeing ourselves from centuries of crown royal zionic nazi greed fear ego inbred psychopathology?
And all will be okay.
We can't even programmatically detect and filter APK. Something tells me we're going to have a hard time with terrorist videos.
Better yet, a HATE button.
Firstly, such videos should not be removed, "Know thy enemy" you know. I guess the best way to deal with them is to put them behind the usual 18+ rating as youtube has already been doing for years to even slightly provocative clips.
Secondly, most people, this journalist included, don't understand terrorism. Its goal is not to kill, but to be heard and to suggest fear. Your risk of dying of terrorism is many magnitudes lower than dying from other natural courses, including a vehicle crash or cancer.
The best way to deal with terrorism is to neglect them totally. Don't let them on TV or radio, or Internet. Fight them behind the curtains.
What I legitimately don't understand is why everyone is so sensitive about these people. They're religious wackos and mentally damaged, and and they do horrible acts. It's true. And yet, they're all the way to the east, and should one live in the United States, they're half the world away. We know our societies and ideas are superior to theirs, and in modern day society we all strive to have free lives. All these people do (to us, anyway) is make videos, and we know our ideas are moral while theirs are not, so... What's the reaction for? Shouldn't society ignore them, the same way the Americans do for the Klu Klux Klan, or the Germans do for the Neonazis (these horrible people, and not for the others? Why does our society collectively feel so insecure about these people, and make the situation worse by legitimizing their cause with ineffective actions, as opposed to those other groups?
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
I'm going to need Bennett Haselton to post a comprehensive analysis of this proposal and compare and contrast it to his own algorithm before I can make a truly informed decision to ignore this topic.
People. The only way to deal with it on places like Youtube is to have viewers flag the videos and then have actual people review the videos to see if they are in fact terrorist related. It also needs to be written out and clearly defined what exactly is considered "terrorist". Anything less than that is ripe for abuse. Not to mention that automating the process would be a nightmare, as the summary alludes to. Sure, having people whose only job is to check and see if videos are terrorist related, but if the problem is so bad that censoring the internet is the next logical step then it should be worth the expense, right?
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
We can do speech to text, and search for groups of key words, that have a high statistical correlation. We can resolve video to a series of stills and use the same hashing methods and flesh tone detection porn filters use. Its actually not hard at all if you don't care about a high false positive rate.
The result though will be a very high false positive rate that makes these services way less useful.
I come back to it AGAIN the political sentiment is that something has to be 'done' about the the Internet. Noises form both side of the political aisle are being made, it can't be stopped. It will get tucked into appropriations bills etc even if the public makes a stink. Because we can't stop it we need instead to be working to make sure its the most favorable compromise possible.
To me Trump's vague statements about shutting some of that down are probably the best thing to run with. I would rather see Great Firewall of America where we largely cut off traffic to and from the rest of the world. At least if the alternative is government minders and though police peeking into every service, insisting every protocol use broken cryptography, and be registered and subject to monitoring etc. In the end that is really the choice.
Globalism isn't any better on a social level than on an economic level, its time make the Internet a little less global and like more of an America only sandbox. The rest of the world can do what they like with their own damn network.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
So these videos you can watch and censor, and yet other people, well if they saw them they'd become radicalized?
So what makes you so special that you don't get radicalized?
Really Nanny Lauren? You think you are so special?
Youtubes policy on violent videos is its choice, those videos move to Liveleak, beheadings, killings etc. and are often shown selectively on Fox news. So apparently they're not so radicalizing, rather can be used as counter-propaganda.
> "Have you seen any of the current ISIL recruitment videos? They're colorful, fast-paced, energetic, and incredibly professional. Absolutely state of the art 21st century propaganda aimed at young people."
Provide the link, and we'll decide for ourselves. Being grown up and all. Why would we accept your review? Why would we fear a pop video anymore than a Fox news video?
Ignore them.
AC
Don't eat the pudding that suggests Muslims are the only god-belief group filled with folks who would punish those who disagree with them.
Hatred is a flammable, tangible thing, and it will burn itself out quickly enough.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
The best solution would be that any time a terrorist video is found, the soundtrack is automatically replaced with Yakety Sax.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Yes, there are always weak minds that can be influenced. But, on the other hand, the terrorists look like rabid dogs caught up in a frenzy or at times look like some sort of clown show. Maybe letting them rant away earns them more disrespect than anything else. So far their revolution has yielded them misery and loss. Maybe if they suffer enough they will get a clue.
What am i supposed to masturbate to if terrorism videos don't exist?
Jerry Springer for President
Lets say that your proposal is implemented in the full glory that you think it should be, Lauren.
What happens when your crowd starts filtering out content based on what they don't like?
What if your "large scale designed to average out variations in cultural attitudes" turns into a stuffed ballet box for one ideology/political party?
More importantly, what happens when the messages go underground to websites that are not part of your anti-ISIS cabal?
Seems to me that the best we can do is make the report inappropriate/offensive content buttons bigger, as the alternative is a slippery slope leading to an anti-free speech version of the DMCA.
You mean censorship? Ahh yes, well we've already established that the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. Carry on. Every success with your endeavors, etc. Pssst: it won't fucking work.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Shoot at the screen, and post the picture.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Require all of the videos to be played back at 150% speed, with the musical accompaniment of the Nyancat song, with all voices replaced by audio clips of 1980s children's television shows and subtitles in the style of the doge meme.
Just about as practical to implement and probably more effective.
We are working out the final bugs for a filter to differentiate between our (approved) jingoism from their (unapproved) incitement.
Have gnu, will travel.
Video recognition. This Vienna-based company is called SailLabs. I'm sort of acquainted with the CTO, and got a demo once. Pretty awesome. They can analyze hundreds of video streams in near-real time.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
So the big idea is to crowd source detection, where people will volunteer to spend their time rooting out videos of a dubious nature?
This sounds like ;
A) an excellent way of getting yourself on a watch list as a consumer of videos of the kind that gets you noticed by the authorities.
B) an excellent excuse if you are a consumer of videos of the kind that gets you noticed by the authorities.
> compared against a known database
I am amused by the thought that there is a job of compiling a known database of child porn images.
But the JEW doesn't want you to be able to find out how many things they've been lying to you about...
www.codoh.com
Oy vey, it's a "hate" crime! (TM)
I think that we, as reasonable people, can agree that any video found guilty of massacring civilians, bombing things, poisoning the water supply, or similar atrocities can be considered a 'terrorist video' and duly punished with a life sentence to a neglected LTO tape in an offsite vault somewhere.
For videos that just consist of an encoded series of frames and maybe a soundtrack; perhaps we should stop hyperventilating.
There exists a legitimate threat, as evidenced by San Bernardino, Paris and other successful attacks that militant groups have been able to pull off. I think we can also expect many more of these going forward. That threat is being greatly exaggerated however. We need to keep cool and examine it at a rational level. It's unfortunate that people don't seem to have the slightest understanding of probabilities. e.g. comparing the odds of being killed or injured by a terrorist vs. the odds of being killed or injured in a traffic accident.
We can't cower in fear of this exaggerated threat and allow government to crack down on Free Speech in the name of protecting us. We also can't allow them to use these incidents as an excuse to enact further gun control or turn the nation into more of a police state than it already is.
F*** Lauren Weinstein and all of the censors (and gun grabbers) who would undermine liberty in the name of safety.
The REAL (and obvious!) solution is a radical shift in the USA government's policy of relentless militarism which has caused death, destruction, instability and massive human suffering in Middle Eastern countries.
to say that they don't want anyone to have the freedom to say what they want.
If a private service wants to ban them or whatever, that's fine, but having major presidential candidates railing about how we should be colluding to censor them everywhere is fucking scary. That's a very slippery slope and more indicative of a terrorist victory than any beheading video.
If I'm not mistaken, once YouTube starts removing videos for content, outside of the parameters of law, they become responsible for policing all content. Fact is... ISIL is usng 21st century techniques, we can't respond to that by still thinking in the paradigm of the '80s.
Get rid of those bullshit anti-Planned Parenthood videos first.
Those were videos of Planned Parenthood employees talking about what they do at work. Does having publically funded organizations having what they do posted online offend you for some reason? Sounds like you want to force people to pay for things you want money spent on, but you don't think they should be allowed to express an opinion on it or even publically post what that money is being used for.
Are you so insecure in your opinions that you can't risk honest debate about it?
It is all about public accountability. Let the public decide.
Give every asshole the right to free speech like any other human being. At least this gives the public the opportunity to ridicule them for their dumb beliefs and turn them into social pariahs. Who decides on which video is terroristic? Never give that power or your Constitutional rights over to unaccountable individuals.
Be careful of what you ask for. First, the "no fly list" was to prevent some people from flying on airplanes, now the list is used to inconvenience dissidents(journalists, protesters..) and might soon be expanded to become a "gun ban" list. All enforced in secret with no public accountability. Isn't scope creep wonderful? Don't give the bureaucrats an inch or they will take more than a mile.
Figure out a way to trick them in to using copyrighted material and sit back while they are banished from the internet with DMCA take down notices! Blam, you're welcome.
We saw the accusations that Assange was a High-Tech terrorist.
Is there anyone out there Naive enough to believe that any form of authorized information suppression won't be abused?
Is there anyone out there who is Naive enough to think that terrorists are more destructive and threatening than certain governments around the world involved in regime change through covert action or just straight bulllshit and propaganda to justify operations which leaves tens to hundreds of thousands of innocent people dead?
I'd rather let terrorists have their videos, than allow suppression of the truth.
It's like censorship.
It's difficult to define what is or is not a terrorist video.
Then there's that pesky 1st amendment again.
Let's look at both "sides." This is easy.
First, let's say terrorism works. Suppose, upon seeing this coverage it really occurs to you, "Hey, they're right! These murder videos do convince me that the murderers aren't fuckwits, they actually know what they're talking about, they're politically astute, and their ideas make sense. I'm voting differently in the next election!" If that's the case, then "dealing" with the videos is a bad idea, because the videos are a good thing. They enlighten your thinking by set a positive example for how to solve political disagreements.
Second, let's say terrorism doesn't work. Upon seeing this coverage, you think, "Well, they kind of just skipped over the argument there and are just murdering people, I guess because it's fun and their form of paranormal belief says video games are bad." If that's the case, then "dealing" with the videos is a bad idea, because the videos are a good thing. They enlighten your thinking by setting a futile, dangerous, literally-self-destructive example for what happens if you approach political disagreements with an attitude of supreme arrogance and lack of planning.
It seems that both sides are in agreement that the videos need not be suppressed. Is there a third side?
Mock them. Photoshop, video editor, audio overlay whatever. You know those people that go around photo-editing vacation photos in weird and wonderful ways, or that dude that replaces key items in Republican photos with d*ldos. Do that.
Add a little snippet of somebody getting it on with a goat in the background. Replace the voice with somebody saying they've married three of their cousins. Add a few vibrators replacing machines guns, whatever. There's no need to "hide" the videos as if we're scared of them. Instead make them ridiculous.
When the first of the concentration camps in NAZI Germany were liberated, there was some doubt among those not present about the veracity of the reports. The sheet scale of the horror was hard to comprehend as it had never been done in modern history. Thousands of pictures and movies were made of the camps in order to preserve the evidence of just how bad humanity can be. Hiding the truth of those horrors does not prevent them from recurring.
The truth about what terrorists say is important for people to hear and see. It is important for people to see the words and the faith twisted into violence and horror so that they will know what those people are doing. Some people will be afraid, but that will not stop the terrorist - nor will hiding those images from the weak willed benefit society. This is a struggle between what is good, human rights, and what is evil - killing people for a difference of religion, opinion, or in many cases sheer greed. Censoring knowledge because a few people might be upset by the images or descriptions is not a valid reason.
WE have to accept that this violence, this evil, is a part of who we are as a species. Hiding from it will not allow us to learn to control it and keep the horror at bay. Honesty is the first step to becoming a better people. We have to face this terrorism and fight it with what ever means we have. Hiding from it will not stop it.
Creative Spelling Copyright (2002). May use without Persimmons
Fuck this idea and the persons who espouse it.
Video at 11 !
Just that.
http://www.acetonestudio.com
This is the internet! After you've seen one beheading, you've seen 'em all. Unless they get creative and mix up their style, nobody will give a shit about those videos anymore in a month or two.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
First they came for the terrorists, and i said nothing because i was not a terrorist...
The West is still running all the plays in Bin Laden's playbook, I see.
The very idea of censoring them proclaims our hypocrisy even more loudly than their crimes against humanity: Freedom of Speech (TM) is only allowed for White Christians. Even worse, it lends credence to their conceit that such videos can easily destroy the very concept of a secular, open, democratic society (although even that concept is fraying badly due to self-harm allowed by power-mad fascists). Cowardice, plain and simple.
You detect them and replace them with Frontline episodes.
Simply removing them so people can go on living in la la land is just allowing people to go on with their heads in the sand (like most things of long term importance).
I would say a "terrorist" button, but all those buttons would be used on specific religions and opposing political candidates, instead of actual terrorist media
If only Youtube had a moderation where it could marked "Troll" to oblivion from view via member voting. Despite Slashdot going to shit in audience, it still has the best moderation system to date for a public forum.
Life is not for the lazy.
Take the original video off line, and replace it with one of a Special Forces unit taking out the person that posted it on line. Let them all think we have a nice all expense paid resort vacation awaiting them at Guantanamo Bay. All you need do to enter the contest is to post your favourite terrorist slasher video.
I know I'm going to be downvoted to all hell, but I just wanted to put out there that I and millions of other people actually like watching these videos. Sure, it is bad that someone died in the video, but banning the video isn't going to bring them back. I like watching videos of people die, but that doesn't mean I want people to die.
Along a timeline of a x length, every viewpoint gets to say what distasteful is.
Eventually, folks who think your speech is hateful will gain sway.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
There is already a mechanism in place to remove videos that offend IP owners... the DMCA and take down notices.
Why can't terrorist videos use the same mechanism, or is protecting a movie more important than letting people watch Daesh set another woman on fire?
If you're going to censor those videos, perhaps it would be better to replace them with (uncensored) porn. Muslims aren't allowed to look at it, and it will probably give them something to think about. Perhaps ease some of the tension in the Middle East.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways