5 ms·
From what I've seen, there usually isn't a human reviewer. It's usually some sort of AI thing that gets it right 99% of the time but leaves the 1% pretty strand
by CitrusFruits 5y ago
From what I've seen, there usually isn't a human reviewer. It's usually some sort of AI thing that gets it right 99% of the time but leaves the 1% pretty stranded without a good appeal process.
I remember hearing about a lifestyle vlogger who couldn't say "lesbian", and being a lesbian, talked used the word quite often. To get around it and other related but similarly censored topics, they developed substitute words to use combined with a translation on screen for what their word actually meant.
- BugsJustFindMe 5y ago> From what I've seen, there usually isn't a human reviewer. It's usually some sort of AI thing that gets it right 99% of the time but leaves the 1% pretty stranded without a good appeal process. In the video she says she asked for human review and the alleged human alleged reviewer confirmed the restriction, because that's the world we live in now I guess.
- sidewndr46 5y agoIt'd be neat if they gave the content creator a chance to administer their own turing test to the reviewer in an attempt to "prove" they are human. Of course one could argue asking "do you really think having a prosthetic leg is unacceptable content?" is a Turing test all on its own.