4 ms·
The block was for “harmful and dangerous” content. That’s incredibly vague. Even describing a game using aggressive language could fall foul of such a broad fil
by afavour 6y ago
The block was for “harmful and dangerous” content. That’s incredibly vague. Even describing a game using aggressive language could fall foul of such a broad filter.
How many times do non-chess channels get caught in this filter? That’s the first question I’d be asking. I have to assume more than zero times. How many chess channels have not been banned by this filter? Again, presumably more than zero. And yet the article makes conclusions with a dataset of 1.
- deepnotderp 6y agoHave you watched adagmator? He doesn’t really use aggressive language
- afavour 6y agoIt was just an example. Another example: “bishop attacks king” could be interpreted as dangerous or harmful content. It’s so vague we have no idea.