4 ms·
The AI doesn't seem to remove them though, it just flags them for human review. In theory, these humans should be the ones determining intent.
by sbov 9y ago
The AI doesn't seem to remove them though, it just flags them for human review. In theory, these humans should be the ones determining intent.
- duskwuff 9y agoAnd in this case, there should probably be a separately trained group of reviewers to carefully examine these videos. Not the same group that's quickly checking over videos to see if they're pornographic, for instance.
- mc32 9y agoI think most of their review ops are in Manila, PH, no? It'd take some time to get them up to speed on that...
- jtmcmc 9y agothe highest level are in the US
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y agoWhy do you believe that to be the case?
- vacri 9y agoO_o
- vacri 9y agoWhat am I missing here? How is the openly racist GP comment not pounded into the gray? Or flagged?
- CaptSpify 9y agoHow is their comment openly racist?
- mc32 9y agoAll I am saying is it takes time for things to propagate. If HQ were in PH, then things would have faster turnaround is all I'm saying. Do you see "race" in every bit of convo. If I said white chocolate or black chocolate, do the colors auto infer race somehow? If I prefer black or white choco what does that mean? If I prefer black or white or does that mean I'm destroying consuming black or white? Just calm down.
- vacri 9y agoYes, because "They're in the philipines... it'd take them longer" is totally the same as "black chocolate" (who says "black" chocolate anyway?)
- ben_w 9y agoThat's certainly a first step, but I doubt it's a full solution. What's the phrase, "dog whistles" for phrases and keywords that only a target audience would understand?
- shallot_router 9y agoHow do you know there isn't already a separately trained group of reviews whose only role is to carefully examine videos related to war crimes/terrorism/violence? I suspect there was, and Google/YouTube's senior management just decided to take a harder line on it than they should've.