Is Google's Comment Filtering Tool 'Vanishing' Legitimate Comments? (vortex.com)

Slashdot reader Lauren Weinstein writes: Google has announced (with considerable fanfare) public access to their new "Perspective" comment filtering system API, which uses Google's machine learning/AI system to determine which comments on a site shouldn't be displayed due to perceived high spam/toxicity scores. It's a fascinating effort. And if you run a website that supports comments, I urge you not to put this Google service into production, at least for now.

The bottom line is that I view Google's spam detection systems as currently too prone to false positives -- thereby enabling a form of algorithm-driven "censorship" (for lack of a better word in this specific context) -- especially by "lazy" sites that might accept Google's determinations of comment scoring as gospel... as someone who deals with significant numbers of comments filtered by Google every day -- I have nearly 400K followers on Google Plus -- I can tell you with considerable confidence that the problem isn't "spam" comments that are being missed, it's completely legitimate non-spam, non-toxic comments that are inappropriately marked as spam and hidden by Google.
Lauren is also collecting noteworthy experiences for a white paper about "the perceived overall state of Google (and its parent corporation Alphabet, Inc.)" to better understand how internet companies are now impacting our lives in unanticipated ways. He's inviting people to share their recent experiences with "specific Google services (including everything from Search to Gmail to YouTube and beyond), accounts, privacy, security, interactions, legal or copyright issues -- essentially anything positive, negative, or neutral that you are free to impart to me, that you believe might be of interest."

Comments

Time for a new search engine?

[AHuxley]

A search engine that still searches the internet?
Less effort on creating Hero Brigades and more effort on been a search engine?
If a US search engine wants to be a safe SJW protected service with lots of ads, what would the results look like?
The rest of the internet can create a real search engine that finds results. Not having SJW approval to show results would make for some fun marketing.
The internet is not a problem. SJW filtering of the internet is showing less results and users expect a working search engine.
The news is good, as one global search engine becomes more of a safe space, better search brands are been developed and funded.
All a search engine has to do is search. If people want safe party political results why not set up a "safe" space list site?
Everyone can then be happy. The SJW teams get their reporting and banning projects funded. SJW approved political and culturally safe link lists.
Back to the early 1990's with the entire safe internet presented as a link list in 2017.
Just list the very best in safe sites? No filtering, no questions, no comments. Just safe news and party political talking points.
No blasphemy, no faith related cartoon sites, no mention of Tiananmen square and 1989. Think of how safe that limited list of sites could be.
No links to any news sites that allow comments about illegal migrants?

Thing about spam

[buss_error]

The thing about spam is that for as long as I can remember (at least back to 1997) people have insisted upon a technical solution for spam. The issue is that spam is not a technical problem. It's a human problem. Like any other problem/response cycle, if you are solving for the wrong issue, don't be shocked if the solution isn't as bad or worse than the problem. Another issue, not directly on point, is Google Email and anti-spam. I know of several organizations that have completely shut down their email infrastructure in favor of Google email services. An unaddressed problem is that these organizations have also laid off their email folks since "Google takes care of it all" so subtle and not so subtle issues often go not simply unaddressed, but unknown to the organization. The result has been a high rate of false positives, including senders without DKIM. I once got into a argument with John Lavine about DKIM, in which he got pretty passionate. I argue that DKIM is:

1. Needlessly opaque

2. Prone to abuse from over zealous admins

3. Google does it wrong (Checking the header chain all the way back instead of the last system the recipient does not run)

4. Breaks email standards

5. Doesn't solve any issue that SPF does not solve more directly, without possible abuse, and much more simply, requires far fewer CPU resources and skill, and does not break email standards in the process.
I'm told that "I'm too stupid" to know how it works and "I should get out of computers since you obviously are too stupid to know your f'ing job!" (both quotes from right here on slash dot). I won't try to prove otherwise, but one question I've asked over and over again is how DKIM, checked back further than the last untrusted relay, does not break email standards for list or forwarded mail. SPF won't break those, DKIM will, every time.

So getting back to our muttons, I'm not surprised that Google's spam engine (or anyone's, for that matter) has a high false positive rate, or a lower than desired true positive rate. That issue is simple - they are attempting to solve a problem with technology that isn't technical in nature. Stop using a hammer to try to screw in a light bulb. Doesn't work well.

Re:Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they moderated someone they disagree with into oblivion. Want to read real comments (including all the garbage) - browse at -1 to see what people are actually saying, not what the current no-life karma whores deem accepted in the current agenda/groupthink.

I only post AC on slashdot. Why? Because I cannot be banned by other users.I registered to comment once. I made several simple non-spam posts of my opinions on some windows tech topic, and was promptly banned from posting - by other users! I guess they did not want people to see what I had to say.

Slashdot's "meta-moderation" system is cowardly censorship hiding behind sockpuppet accounts, Want to foster real discussion? Take ownership of your content and moderation team, have some integrity and courage and stand behind your decisions.

Slashdot's censorship system is terrible. I see better discussions in youtube comments these days, believe it or not.

Re:automated

[AmiMoJo]

Be careful with this one. There are exactly zero examples in TFA, no evidence of what is being claimed. It's just an anecdote at this point.

Any kind of filter will never be 100% perfect. That's just the nature of filters. Occasionally the odd bit of spam will get through, the odd legit message will be marked as spam. That doesn't mean they are not useful. We should wait for actual data before making a judgement here.

Ultimately it's up to the individual. If you ant full uncensored speech then turn off your spam filter and handle the torrent manually. If you have better thing to do with your life and your channel is just Pokemon Go videos anyway, something like this could be useful.