3 ms·
At 300 hours/minute they'd need 18,000 pairs of eyes judging videos constantly (not all videos need to be judged immediately, but that's fine). Assuming a norma
by delecti 9y ago
At 300 hours/minute they'd need 18,000 pairs of eyes judging videos constantly (not all videos need to be judged immediately, but that's fine). Assuming a normal employee works 50 weeks of 40 hours a year, that means that each employee is only working about 23% of the time. In the end they'd need about 80,000 employees to judge everything that gets uploaded. Wikipedia says they had 57,100 employees in 2015. With inefficiency (HR, payroll, managers, manager-managers, devs to write video audit software, etc), they'd need to triple their workforce solely to keep up with youtube.
- ocdtrekkie 9y agoAs both I and the parent suggested, you'd only need humans reviewing content that is reported or automatically flagged. And you'd have a second level set of people for appeals handling.
- dmoy 9y agoRight but if, like is happening in this case, the owner of the video intentionally does not appeal... then what?