4 ms·

The smartest technologists and developers of our generation go to work for companies like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, and others, and what we see are t

The smartest technologists and developers of our generation go to work for companies like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, and others, and what we see are these results. Why can't we do better for everyone?

Nextgrid 5y ago
There is no financial incentive to.
- PeterCorless 5y ago
  There are HUGE financial incentives to ensuring that creators get paid for their work, and that consumers/users get the content they pay for, and that a channel can help negotiate content rights as intermediaries between creators and consumers. The problem is that we have taken stabs at this in the past, and they were too narrow-minded or draconian to take on. And some of the execs at these huge companies don't see the upside of facilitating this new marketplace of creation. It is literally a trillion dollar industry. But we are throwing really primitive "solutions" at the problem. See my post elsewhere in the thread as to what we need in 2021 and going forward.
  - Nextgrid 5y ago
    I don't disagree there are technically huge incentives to ensure everyone is paid what they're rightfully owed. But currently the problem is that in aggregate, it brings more money to rely on an overreaching algorithm (which is already built and paid-for) that favours big established labels as opposed to small-scale creators; the money they would spend on ensuring everyone gets paid fairly by building a better system wouldn't be recouped by the (relatively small) revenue they'd get from small-scale creators being able to participate. When I mentioned financial incentives, I didn't really mean incentives in terms of making more money - as per the above I don't think there is enough money to justify improving the current system. What I meant is that there should be more enforcement; what the current system does is actually committing copyright infringement by misattributing the revenue to the wrong creators, and if this was punished appropriately it would provide a financial incentive to resolve this problem.
Synaesthesia 5y ago
Because the corporate interests of Google, Facebook and the reat dont align with the interests of small indepedent people but large companies like themselves.
toolz 5y ago
I feel like this comment was intended to spell out how poorly the world is doing, but those companies have moved technology forward leaps and bounds. I won't pretend to know enough to suggest they're net good for the world or to know everything they've done, but I'm also very aware of the progress we've seen because of those companies. Just think about how much money people have saved from DIY projects on YouTube, for example or how skills have been learned.
jorams 5y ago
Unfortunately this isn't really a technical problem. Content ID exists to appease large organizations that sued YouTube into the ground for not doing enough to counter copyright infringement. This claim process takes place before the legal copyright claim process. The legal process would require YouTube to take the video down immediately, and it would be required to stay down for at least two weeks even if the claim is bogus. (Or YouTube could decide not to follow the process and be held liable in case of actual infringement.) There is no presumed innocence. The DMCA is constantly being abused, and the only possible punishment for malicious claims is an expensive lawsuit. It wouldn't surprise me at all if half of all DMCA takedown requests would be considered fair use in court, but the vast majority never get there.

Nextgrid 5y ago

There is no financial incentive to.

PeterCorless 5y ago
There are HUGE financial incentives to ensuring that creators get paid for their work, and that consumers/users get the content they pay for, and that a channel can help negotiate content rights as intermediaries between creators and consumers. The problem is that we have taken stabs at this in the past, and they were too narrow-minded or draconian to take on. And some of the execs at these huge companies don't see the upside of facilitating this new marketplace of creation. It is literally a trillion dollar industry. But we are throwing really primitive "solutions" at the problem. See my post elsewhere in the thread as to what we need in 2021 and going forward.
- Nextgrid 5y ago
  I don't disagree there are technically huge incentives to ensure everyone is paid what they're rightfully owed. But currently the problem is that in aggregate, it brings more money to rely on an overreaching algorithm (which is already built and paid-for) that favours big established labels as opposed to small-scale creators; the money they would spend on ensuring everyone gets paid fairly by building a better system wouldn't be recouped by the (relatively small) revenue they'd get from small-scale creators being able to participate. When I mentioned financial incentives, I didn't really mean incentives in terms of making more money - as per the above I don't think there is enough money to justify improving the current system. What I meant is that there should be more enforcement; what the current system does is actually committing copyright infringement by misattributing the revenue to the wrong creators, and if this was punished appropriately it would provide a financial incentive to resolve this problem.

Synaesthesia 5y ago

Because the corporate interests of Google, Facebook and the reat dont align with the interests of small indepedent people but large companies like themselves.

toolz 5y ago

I feel like this comment was intended to spell out how poorly the world is doing, but those companies have moved technology forward leaps and bounds. I won't pretend to know enough to suggest they're net good for the world or to know everything they've done, but I'm also very aware of the progress we've seen because of those companies. Just think about how much money people have saved from DIY projects on YouTube, for example or how skills have been learned.

jorams 5y ago

Unfortunately this isn't really a technical problem. Content ID exists to appease large organizations that sued YouTube into the ground for not doing enough to counter copyright infringement. This claim process takes place before the legal copyright claim process. The legal process would require YouTube to take the video down immediately, and it would be required to stay down for at least two weeks even if the claim is bogus. (Or YouTube could decide not to follow the process and be held liable in case of actual infringement.) There is no presumed innocence. The DMCA is constantly being abused, and the only possible punishment for malicious claims is an expensive lawsuit. It wouldn't surprise me at all if half of all DMCA takedown requests would be considered fair use in court, but the vast majority never get there.