6 ms·
Perhaps the author does not understand the logistical nightmare of having human moderators manually approve all content. Further, the fact that YouTube, Facebo
by mftf 9y ago
Perhaps the author does not understand the logistical nightmare of having human moderators manually approve all content.
Further, the fact that YouTube, Facebook, et al. Have failed to police content to the author's satisfaction is not indicative of a failure in AI - especially when these corporations are effectively incentivized by view counts and advertisement not to remove these videos.
In short, YouTube's failure is not a valid indicator of the effecticeness of AI in general.
- deong 9y agoI don't think the author cares about the logistics of it, nor should he. If you offer me a service, it's up to you to figure out how to provide that service. If doing so is a logistical nightmare, then you're failing uphold your end of the bargain. No one is forcing YouTube to market a kid's channel. As to whether today's AI is up to the task, I think it's fairly hard to say definitively. It seems certain that we haven't yet fielded a system that does it very well though.
- Chaebixi 9y ago> Perhaps the author does not understand the logistical nightmare of having human moderators manually approve all content. Pretty sure he does, from the OP: > A step back to assert human control -- even if it cuts into the tech companies wide profit margins -- is overdue indeed. The tech companies use these algorithms because they're cheap and they're good-enough for their profit-making purposes. If Google's algorithms can't keep YouTube Kids kid-friendly, then they need to hire the human moderators to make up the difference or kill the product (because it's false advertising).