3 ms·

>But if I don't contest the claims, how can youtube possibly count them as abusive? I'm not saying Alphabet/Google/Youtube did this, but they do things on a ma

>But if I don't contest the claims, how can youtube possibly count them as abusive? I'm not saying Alphabet/Google/Youtube did this, but they do things on a massive scale and they could "look into" a reasonable sample of claims all on their own and generate very good statistics. (always good to remember, statistical significance is independent of population size, only dependent on sample size, and rather small samples have a lot of significance, see birthday paradox)

speerer 2y ago
I don't think it's right that statistical significance is independent of population. 1 sample out of a population size 1 is plainly more significant than 1 in 100.
- fsckboy 2y ago
  I'm not good enough at this to be explaining it, but statistical significance is based on probabilities. if humans have a 10% chance of having cancer at any moment, and you have one human on an entire planet, the probability for that planet is still 1/10 and not 100% or 0 based on whether that person has or does not have cancer, and having one sample from that population of 1 does not increase your confidence in the answer as to whether his cancer represents a cancer cluster. or something like that. If you need a sample of 30 people to achieve a certain degree of confidence, whether that sample comes from a population of 30 people or a population of 100,000 people, same confidence. We aren't trying to establish what percentage of people have cancer at any given moment, we are trying to establish whether this population matches what we know about the percentage who "should" have cancer. I'm really bad at explaining this. the more times you flip a coin, the more confidence you'll have in understanding the probabilities of that coin. for a given confidence level, you don't need to flip that coin more by 100x, you already know. There might be a population of a million coin flips, but you just need a sample of a certain size to obtain confidence that your sample is representative.
gritspartan 2y ago
Scale is part of the problem. It actually hurts small businesses. There is a probably on Google Maps where a marketer will setup a website, a lot of business listings, and get a Google Business Profile for a "local business" which doesn't actually exist. This is all setup to attract unsuspecting customers to share their information which is then sold to local contractors often without informing the customers and/or the local contractors. It's a practice known as lead gen and/or rank-and-rent. For an example, you can look up a "business" called Seattle Grease Trap Services on Google Maps. It's part of a network of fake businesses run by marketer in Hawaii. Check the profiles of the people who leave reviews to find some of the others. Another example is found by searching for deck builders in Chicago. There are several variations of Koval, TOD, CPC, and similar companies. This is all operated by a local marketing company that I managed to identify in less than an hour. I report these frauds, nothing happens. I escalate. Nothing happens. So I've given up, but I know that these listings cost local businesses actually work. And even though they're against Google guidelines, nothing happens.

speerer 2y ago

I don't think it's right that statistical significance is independent of population. 1 sample out of a population size 1 is plainly more significant than 1 in 100.

fsckboy 2y ago
I'm not good enough at this to be explaining it, but statistical significance is based on probabilities. if humans have a 10% chance of having cancer at any moment, and you have one human on an entire planet, the probability for that planet is still 1/10 and not 100% or 0 based on whether that person has or does not have cancer, and having one sample from that population of 1 does not increase your confidence in the answer as to whether his cancer represents a cancer cluster. or something like that. If you need a sample of 30 people to achieve a certain degree of confidence, whether that sample comes from a population of 30 people or a population of 100,000 people, same confidence. We aren't trying to establish what percentage of people have cancer at any given moment, we are trying to establish whether this population matches what we know about the percentage who "should" have cancer. I'm really bad at explaining this. the more times you flip a coin, the more confidence you'll have in understanding the probabilities of that coin. for a given confidence level, you don't need to flip that coin more by 100x, you already know. There might be a population of a million coin flips, but you just need a sample of a certain size to obtain confidence that your sample is representative.

gritspartan 2y ago

Scale is part of the problem. It actually hurts small businesses. There is a probably on Google Maps where a marketer will setup a website, a lot of business listings, and get a Google Business Profile for a "local business" which doesn't actually exist. This is all setup to attract unsuspecting customers to share their information which is then sold to local contractors often without informing the customers and/or the local contractors. It's a practice known as lead gen and/or rank-and-rent. For an example, you can look up a "business" called Seattle Grease Trap Services on Google Maps. It's part of a network of fake businesses run by marketer in Hawaii. Check the profiles of the people who leave reviews to find some of the others. Another example is found by searching for deck builders in Chicago. There are several variations of Koval, TOD, CPC, and similar companies. This is all operated by a local marketing company that I managed to identify in less than an hour. I report these frauds, nothing happens. I escalate. Nothing happens. So I've given up, but I know that these listings cost local businesses actually work. And even though they're against Google guidelines, nothing happens.