5 ms·
> I'm a tad surprised that the dataset cannot include a field such as "this recording is of public domain music" If there's not a financial incentive to preven
by save_ferris 6y ago
> I'm a tad surprised that the dataset cannot include a field such as "this recording is of public domain music"
If there's not a financial incentive to prevent situations like this, the likelihood that YouTube will correct it is approximately nil.
The sad truth is that the parties controlling the recordings that YouTube's algos erroneously protect are probably worth more to them financially than some church that broadcasts these performances.
- pmiller2 6y agoThis is an excellent, albeit seemingly unintentional, critique of capitalism. In a nutshell, if it doesn't make money, it's probably not happening.
- ARandomerDude 6y agoStrange comment on a free forum (HN), with multi-industry fame.
- pmiller2 6y agoAre you trying to argue that HN doesn't make money? Because, I'm sure Paul Graham might have something to say about that. The forum itself might literally be free to users, but the marketing value to YC is priceless.
- save_ferris 6y agoHow is the fact that this forum is free to post on relevant to the argument? The vast majority of sites that support comments (including YouTube) are free to post on.
- basilgohar 6y agoI don't know why parent's comments were downvoted, but this captures the same sentiment that is often reiterated frequently, "the market will correct/adapt" or "market forces will adjust" and so on.
- pmiller2 6y agoOh, I get why I was downvoted. You can't criticize capitalism on HN and expect to get upvoted. For instance, take a look at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23232811 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23232811 . That comment is at -2.
- throwaway9482 6y agoDefinitely didn’t help that your comment sounded negative and angry
- pmiller2 6y agoSo, I'm not allowed to be angry or criticize anything on HN? That's news to me.
- throwaway9482 6y agoYou’re so looking for an argument lol
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- roenxi 6y agoThe copyright system is a little independent of capitalism - without it, the copyright holders wouldn't have any capital. It creates itself. It isn't an unreasonable critique but there are schools of capitalism that do not like the copyright system. That isn't an inherent part of capitalism. Peak capitalism tends to ignore copyright (eg, Silicon Valley in the early glory years, or the market for movies once BitTorrent was developed).
- pmiller2 6y agoThat's exactly why I didn't reference copyright in my comment, even though the article itself centered around it. The word "probably" was carefully chosen as well. There are definitely things that people do that don't make money, but few of them ever reach any significant scale. The major exception I can think of these days is the Linux kernel, which famously was a "just for fun" project. Another is the GNU project, which basically exists to advance some philosophical principles. But, to a first approximation, in a capitalist system, if $THING doesn't make money, $THING isn't going to get done at any scale which matters. There are exceptions when philosophical principles and inherent human desires (such as curiosity and artistic expression) are involved. The corollary here, in true "the market adapts" fashion, is that if $THING is done and an entity with sufficient money dislikes $THING enough, then $THING will no longer be happening. I'm not sure whether the initial statement, or the corollary is fundamentally more distasteful.