4 ms·

There should be multiple outsourced replacements for copyright detection, which users on YouTube should be able to choose. Otherwise, there’s no incentive to im

There should be multiple outsourced replacements for copyright detection, which users on YouTube should be able to choose. Otherwise, there’s no incentive to improve the models. Could such an option be put into law?

kmeisthax 5y ago
Content ID exists to keep YouTube's nose clean, not yours. What you're asking would be like letting speeders choose what cops get to write them a ticket... in response to certain towns over-prosecuting moving violations for revenue.
petermcneeley 5y ago
You want to make a law that forces options on copyright detection that the users can choose? Thats a pretty specific law. Also like what if one of the options always just returns false? I think writing narrow specific one off use case laws like this is like writing code with a series of if statements. If one wants to go to the effort of changing laws one should write laws that are general and dont contain a bunch of potential loopholes. Aka the law should be written like good code.
- infogulch 5y ago
  Interestingly, the term "code" applied to laws centuries before it was applied to computer code. I'd bet most computer code best practices would apply to law code.
IfOnlyYouKnew 5y ago
We only get to see the system's failures, and only the scandalous or funny at that. The system probably flags tens of thousands of uploads every day. Note how, in this case, it probably did correctly identify segments of a certain length and entropy. At that point, it needs to loop in a human to decide if the audio can be copyrighted. It does so, with the uploader being the first human it asks. Yes, that last part may be annoying, and slightly cheap. But the uploader is also in a better position to judge the matter than some content moderator, so I don't know why it's supposedly scandalous.

4 ms·

There should be multiple outsourced replacements for copyright detection, which users on YouTube should be able to choose. Otherwise, there’s no incentive to im

by rubatuga 5y ago

kmeisthax 5y ago
Content ID exists to keep YouTube's nose clean, not yours. What you're asking would be like letting speeders choose what cops get to write them a ticket... in response to certain towns over-prosecuting moving violations for revenue.
petermcneeley 5y ago
You want to make a law that forces options on copyright detection that the users can choose? Thats a pretty specific law. Also like what if one of the options always just returns false? I think writing narrow specific one off use case laws like this is like writing code with a series of if statements. If one wants to go to the effort of changing laws one should write laws that are general and dont contain a bunch of potential loopholes. Aka the law should be written like good code.
- infogulch 5y ago
  Interestingly, the term "code" applied to laws centuries before it was applied to computer code. I'd bet most computer code best practices would apply to law code.
IfOnlyYouKnew 5y ago
We only get to see the system's failures, and only the scandalous or funny at that. The system probably flags tens of thousands of uploads every day. Note how, in this case, it probably did correctly identify segments of a certain length and entropy. At that point, it needs to loop in a human to decide if the audio can be copyrighted. It does so, with the uploader being the first human it asks. Yes, that last part may be annoying, and slightly cheap. But the uploader is also in a better position to judge the matter than some content moderator, so I don't know why it's supposedly scandalous.