Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Executives Ignored Warnings, Letting Toxic Videos Run Rampant (bloomberg.com)
Proposals to change recommendations and curb conspiracies on YouTube were sacrificed for engagement, Bloomberg reported Monday, citing Google employees. From the report: In recent years, scores of people inside YouTube and Google, its owner, raised concerns about the mass of false, incendiary and toxic content that the world's largest video site surfaced and spread. One employee wanted to flag troubling videos, which fell just short of the hate speech rules, and stop recommending them to viewers. Another wanted to track these videos in a spreadsheet to chart their popularity. A third, fretful of the spread of "alt-right" video bloggers, created an internal vertical that showed just how popular they were. Each time they got the same basic response: Don't rock the boat.
The company spent years chasing one business goal above others: "Engagement," a measure of the views, time spent and interactions with online videos. Conversations with over twenty people who work at, or recently left, YouTube reveal a corporate leadership unable or unwilling to act on these internal alarms for fear of throttling engagement. Wojcicki would "never put her fingers on the scale," said one person who worked for her. "Her view was, 'My job is to run the company, not deal with this.'"
The company spent years chasing one business goal above others: "Engagement," a measure of the views, time spent and interactions with online videos. Conversations with over twenty people who work at, or recently left, YouTube reveal a corporate leadership unable or unwilling to act on these internal alarms for fear of throttling engagement. Wojcicki would "never put her fingers on the scale," said one person who worked for her. "Her view was, 'My job is to run the company, not deal with this.'"
illegal content
Oops.. That's pretty arbitrary, don't you think? Anything can be made illegal at the drop of a hat. Or has everybody forgotten already?
The only thing that is truly threatened by "toxic" content is mass media and the institutions dependent on its propaganda.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Well, it's been such a smashing success in Venezuela...and Cuba....and let's not forget the USSR, although I guess they can claim that thug Putin is a success. N. Korea is just an economic powerhouse.
Really? Fewer than 8K hate crimes per year in a country of 330M people, and you see a problem? Out of ~1.1M violent crimes, mind you....
It should also be noted that violent crime rates have fallen by ~1/3 over the last three decades.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
In Marxism, the labor theory of value rules.
The labor theory of value (the price of a good or service should be equal to the total amount of labor value required to produce it) doesn't reward increase in efficiency. Why should I invest in a method to produce the same goods twice as fast, if that requires halving the price ? Without any effort to maximize efficiency, you'll quickly lose against competing communitities, and that's one reason it's unstable. Also, without a free market with independent agents settling on a mutually agreed price, you'll need an authority to set prices for you, which introduces a target point for corruption, and power struggles.
More generally, the problem with the labor theory of value is that it ignores the value of knowledge. The theory was defined in the context of a stable agrarian society with minimal industry, where the knowledge of how to produce things was fairly uniformly distributed, and innovation was so rare as to be negligible. With no differentials in knowledge to speak of, the output levels were entirely determined by the materials available and the labor applied.
As soon as you recognize that knowledge has value, though, it's trivial to see why the labor theory falls on its face. Invent a way to make widgets with half the materials and half the labor and you're producing twice as much as your competitor for the same cost. More subtly, but perhaps more importantly, discover a situation where some unavailable (or nonexistent!) good or service is needed, and arrange to remedy that need, and you may have generated 10X or 100X value. Knowing where to apply resources to maximize their utility can generate incredible returns to multiple segments of society, often with no losers.
A less-obvious result of ignoring the value of knowledge is that the labor theory is inherently zero-sum. To produce more widgets you have to shift labor away from making whatsits, so you make less of them. But the reality is that you can often create a way to make whozits which can be used to dramatically increase the efficiency of producing both widgets and whatsits, so by taking labor away to produce an entirely new thing, you actually produce more of everything. Such positive-sum outcomes are actually more common than not.
As a philosopher, Marx had some moderately-interesting ideas. As an economist, his ideas were just plain wrong.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.