Culture Youtube gonna be tougher with content control, working with organizations such as ADL - Pepe is gonna be banned.

https://youtube.googleblog.com/2017/08/an-update-on-our-commitment-to-fight.html

A little over a month ago, we told you about the four new steps we’re taking to combat terrorist content on YouTube: better detection and faster removal driven by machine learning, more experts to alert us to content that needs review, tougher standards for videos that are controversial but do not violate our policies, and more work in the counter-terrorism space.

We wanted to give you an update on these commitments:

Better detection and faster removal driven by machine learning: We’ve always used a mix of technology and human review to address the ever-changing challenges around controversial content on YouTube. We recently began developing and implementing cutting-edge machine learning technology designed to help us identify and remove violent extremism and terrorism-related content in a scalable way. We have started rolling out these tools and we are already seeing some positive progress:
  • Speed and efficiency: Our machine learning systems are faster and more effective than ever before. Over 75 percent of the videos we've removed for violent extremism over the past month were taken down before receiving a single human flag.
  • Accuracy: The accuracy of our systems has improved dramatically due to our machine learning technology. While these tools aren’t perfect, and aren’t right for every setting, in many cases our systems have proven more accurate than humans at flagging videos that need to be removed.
  • Scale: With over 400 hours of content uploaded to YouTube every minute, finding and taking action on violent extremist content poses a significant challenge. But over the past month, our initial use of machine learning has more than doubled both the number of videos we've removed for violent extremism, as well as the rate at which we’ve taken this kind of content down.
We are encouraged by these improvements, and will continue to develop our technology in order to make even more progress. We are also hiring more people to help review and enforce our policies, and will continue to invest in technical resources to keep pace with these issues and address them responsibly.

More experts: Of course, our systems are only as good as the the data they’re based on. Over the past weeks, we have begun working with more than 15 additional expert NGOs and institutions through our Trusted Flagger program, including the Anti-Defamation League, the No Hate Speech Movement, and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue. These organizations bring expert knowledge of complex issues like hate speech, radicalization, and terrorism that will help us better identify content that is being used to radicalize and recruit extremists. We will also regularly consult these experts as we update our policies to reflect new trends. And we’ll continue to add more organizations to our network of advisors over time.

Tougher standards: We’ll soon be applying tougher treatment to videos that aren’t illegal but have been flagged by users as potential violations of our policies on hate speech and violent extremism. If we find that these videos don’t violate our policies but contain controversial religious or supremacist content, they will be placed in a limited state. The videos will remain on YouTube behind an interstitial, won’t be recommended, won’t be monetized, and won’t have key features including comments, suggested videos, and likes. We’ll begin to roll this new treatment out to videos on desktop versions of YouTube in the coming weeks, and will bring it to mobile experiences soon thereafter. These new approaches entail significant new internal tools and processes, and will take time to fully implement.

Early intervention and expanding counter-extremism work: We’ve started rolling out features from Jigsaw’s Redirect Method to YouTube. When people search for sensitive keywords on YouTube, they will be redirected towards a playlist of curated YouTube videos that directly confront and debunk violent extremist messages. We also continue to amplify YouTube voices speaking out against hate and radicalization through our YouTube Creators for Change program. Just last week, the U.K. chapter of Creators for Change, Internet Citizens, hosted a two-day workshop for 13-18 year-olds to help them find a positive sense of belonging online and learn skills on how to participate safely and responsibly on the internet. We also pledged to expand the program’s reach to 20,000 more teens across the U.K.

And over the weekend, we hosted our latest Creators for Change workshop in Bandung, Indonesia, where creators teamed up with Indonesia’s Maarif Institute to teach young people about the importance of diversity, pluralism, and tolerance.

Altogether, we have taken significant steps over the last month in our fight against online terrorism. But this is not the end. We know there is always more work to be done. With the help of new machine learning technology, deep partnerships, ongoing collaborations with other companies through the Global Internet Forum, and our vigilant community we are confident we can continue to make progress against this ever-changing threat. We look forward to sharing more with you in the months ahead.

The YouTube Team

This gonna be gud.
 
Well I mean it's plausible, since Google Ideas was created. And staffed with many lolcows/ratkings on this site. They eventually rebranded to Jigsaw, then were moved under Alphabet, Googles parent company. Interestingly Jigsaw isn't listed under Alphabet in linkedin, and the staff roster seems to be largely absent. So you can't even check if shes still working for them or not.

View attachment 257583


View attachment 257589

View attachment 257587
At the group's launch, Schmidt declared its audacious mission to be "tackling the world's toughest geopolitical problems" and listed some of the challenges within in remit: "money laundering, organized crime; police brutality, human trafficking, and terrorism."
So this company perceives good reason to believe its own power so great that these monumental world problems are within its reach to affect?

But when you ask them to take responsibility for the impact their decisions will have on censorship and the freedoms of expression and information on their very own platforms, suddenly everyone gets a dumb look on their face and innocently asks "who, me?"
 
which rat kings? phil? greta? fire?

I don't see any Rat Kings in there.
No visible insane trannies, at least.

What I do see in there is a few cows we've covered, which are in CON's sphere of influence. Most notable here are Quinn and Sarkeesian. I don't need to say anything about either; they both have been covered here numerous times.

Interestingly, we also have a few nutters I'm genuinely surprised we haven't at least discussed threads on yet, including Rose Eveleth (the psychopath who led the charge against Matt Taylor for an offensive shirt), Gloria Steinem cultist Jamia Wilson, and the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI), which veterans of internet war might recognize as one of the loudest groups shrieking that Twitter isn't doing enough to stop hate speech.

Also I find it hilarious that Alphabet listed fighting human trafficking as one of their main goals when Islamic fundamentalists are some of the most prevalent human trafficking purveyors. Stay the course, you fucking degenerates.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Burgers in the ass
I don't see any Rat Kings in there.
No visible insane trannies, at least.

What I do see in there is a few cows we've covered, which are in CON's sphere of influence. Most notable here are Quinn and Sarkeesian. I don't need to say anything about either; they both have been covered here numerous times.

Interestingly, we also have a few nutters I'm genuinely surprised we haven't at least discussed threads on yet, including Rose Eveleth (the psychopath who led the charge against Matt Taylor for an offensive shirt), Gloria Steinem cultist Jamia Wilson, and the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI), which veterans of internet war might recognize as one of the loudest groups shrieking that Twitter isn't doing enough to stop hate speech.

Also I find it hilarious that Alphabet listed fighting human trafficking as one of their main goals when Islamic fundamentalists are some of the most prevalent human trafficking purveyors. Stay the course, you fucking degenerates.

Oh so just anti gg cows. I get it now
 
Basically Google got sued a while back for "Being discriminatory to female employees". To try and disprove this, they hired a ton of the most rabid SJWs, Feminists, and other cow-like females into a group called "Google Ideas" who immediately began cancering up the company.

Not trying to tinfoil hat, but their "Jigsaw" group that's being credited with their search-censorship program is literally a new name for that same "Google Ideas" group.

They actually changed to the Jigsaw name because being associated with Sarkeesian/Quinn and the entire group being advocates for massive censorship made the Google Ideas name universally despised.
 
Basically Google got sued a while back for "Being discriminatory to female employees". To try and disprove this, they hired a ton of the most rabid SJWs, Feminists, and other cow-like females into a group called "Google Ideas" who immediately began cancering up the company.

Not trying to tinfoil hat, but their "Jigsaw" group that's being credited with their search-censorship program is literally a new name for that same "Google Ideas" group.

They actually changed to the Jigsaw name because being associated with Sarkeesian/Quinn and the entire group being advocates for massive censorship made the Google Ideas name universally despised.

So they're pigs, but on the good side, they're also so staggeringly incompetent they're unlikely to be able to achieve much if anything.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Burgers in the ass
YouTube has had a plan in motion, for a long, long time now, to replace cable TV. I'm not talking about making content creators TV. It does not give one fuck about them, including PewDiePie. I am talking about CBS, NBC, ABC, all that shit. Instead of purchasing a Cable Plan, you'd purchase YouTube Tv. Now, advertisers need to run ads on those networks and those networks are now in association with YouTube. It needs to be cleansed of anything and everything they don't like.

YouTube has 0 interest in its content creators and has had for some time. It doesn't defend them, it feeds them to the wolves every time and only reluctantly does things when huge amounts of people annoy them. My guess is the goal is to side-step Netflix and Amazon Prime by just being TV itself because YouTube Red was a massive failure. Basically, YouTube Red showed Google that content creators alone won't cut it. And that it can make way more money partnered with TV networks and their advertisers, then risk some advertisers be on 'controversial' content and be displeased.

They will try to strangle off any sort of money, views or searches from anything remotely controversial in an effort to grab up more juicy and lucrative TV deals. More and more people are 'cord cutting', it is natural that these channels would want to survive. Trad cable operators suck. Everybody hates them and dealing with them and their shit. Getting basic cable for $35 bucks through Google, plus just buying HBO or Showtime's online plans individually is much more appealing. Not to mention imagine Google with TV muscle behind it. Becoming more advertiser friendly, friendly to TV networks, that gets Google a lot of pull. It pits the networks against the cable companies, threatens cable companies themselves and gives them even more power to fight off any swings at slowing down their content. You aren't going to want to throttle YouTube, because that pisses off Google AND like 20 major cable networks. Networks which you have to negotiate with and are currently fighting massive losses in subscribers. Not a situation you want to be in if you are a service provider. Cable companies would be more reluctant to throttle YouTube when it has those networks behind it.

In essence, it wants to ditch the creator model. Its tired of the headaches, its normie unfriendliness and advertiser unfriendliness. The problem is Google can't just do it overnight and say 'Thanks guys, but fuck off now'. They need some way of doing it slowly. The current political climate makes a decent distraction from basically excising almost everyone they don't like from the platform. It will lose them money for sure in the short run, but in the long run they are betting on replacing your cable provider. Which is way more money than any content creator could make them. Why didn't they fight the adpocalypse? Why didn't they fight for their revenue stream? Because for their long term plans, this actually worked in YouTube's favor. It killed everyone's ad revenue, making them either: A) leave YouTube if YouTube didn't approve of them B) Gut the smaller creators it doesn't want C) Making creators it approves of easier to negotiate with as their profits took a hit. You will eventually see only content creators it (and the major TV networks and advertisers) approve of. You see this already, with crappy 'Entertainment Tonight' shit trending with 15k views. Hiring the ADL, TYT and (if true) FemFreq to monitor content again works for them. They are EXTREMELY heavy handed and will basically purge everything not to the left of Mao.

Google is a business. Yes, it has a progressive culture. But money comes first. TV is dying and Google seeks to upend it. Imagine once Google upends TV, and the major networks are on their side instead of a cable providers, the cable providers lose money and then they lose power. This has other benefits, such as Google Fiber being able to expand outwards to more cities. Now you get your TV and internet through one line and one company: Google. Will this work? Is this even their plan? I don't know. But it seems to me that this is the best way to boost profits, eliminate headaches, enhance their corporate muscle, defend against government fuckery and give them new areas to expand into that they were having trouble in before. Problem is that content creators are in their way. Ironically, YouTube is treating them like a cancer: Cut off the blood-flow, they'll wither up and die and replace it with something better and more profitable.

Alternatively, Google has lost its mind, has no plan and got fucktarded with progressive thinking and this will blow up in their face spectacularly. Or just result in the slow death of YouTube because they have no plan, YouTube Red and TV sucks and no one is buying it.
 
One thing that does confuse me is why Jim put Baidu up there as being the last bastion of shitposting. China is far worse and far more effective at the censorship game than anything out of the west.
His point was that the Chinese censors on Weibo would probably be more tolerant of anti-SJW commentary than Google or the other American web giants, because as long as it doesn't challenge the political authority or elite cadre of the Chinese state or rile up the Xinjiang Muslims, the Chinese wouldn't care.
 
His point was that the Chinese censors on Weibo would probably be more tolerant of anti-SJW commentary than Google or the other American web giants, because as long as it doesn't challenge the political authority or elite cadre of the Chinese state or rile up the Xinjiang Muslims, the Chinese wouldn't care.
Well, that's comforting to know.
 
The full google anti-diversity document is now publicly available. It's rather reasonable so small wonder it pissed them off so much.

YouTube has had a plan in motion, for a long, long time now, to replace cable TV. I'm not talking about making content creators TV. It does not give one fuck about them, including PewDiePie. I am talking about CBS, NBC, ABC, all that shit. Instead of purchasing a Cable Plan, you'd purchase YouTube Tv. Now, advertisers need to run ads on those networks and those networks are now in association with YouTube. It needs to be cleansed of anything and everything they don't like.

YouTube has 0 interest in its content creators and has had for some time. It doesn't defend them, it feeds them to the wolves every time and only reluctantly does things when huge amounts of people annoy them. My guess is the goal is to side-step Netflix and Amazon Prime by just being TV itself because YouTube Red was a massive failure. Basically, YouTube Red showed Google that content creators alone won't cut it. And that it can make way more money partnered with TV networks and their advertisers, then risk some advertisers be on 'controversial' content and be displeased.

They will try to strangle off any sort of money, views or searches from anything remotely controversial in an effort to grab up more juicy and lucrative TV deals. More and more people are 'cord cutting', it is natural that these channels would want to survive. Trad cable operators suck. Everybody hates them and dealing with them and their shit. Getting basic cable for $35 bucks through Google, plus just buying HBO or Showtime's online plans individually is much more appealing. Not to mention imagine Google with TV muscle behind it. Becoming more advertiser friendly, friendly to TV networks, that gets Google a lot of pull. It pits the networks against the cable companies, threatens cable companies themselves and gives them even more power to fight off any swings at slowing down their content. You aren't going to want to throttle YouTube, because that pisses off Google AND like 20 major cable networks. Networks which you have to negotiate with and are currently fighting massive losses in subscribers. Not a situation you want to be in if you are a service provider. Cable companies would be more reluctant to throttle YouTube when it has those networks behind it.

In essence, it wants to ditch the creator model. Its tired of the headaches, its normie unfriendliness and advertiser unfriendliness. The problem is Google can't just do it overnight and say 'Thanks guys, but fuck off now'. They need some way of doing it slowly. The current political climate makes a decent distraction from basically excising almost everyone they don't like from the platform. It will lose them money for sure in the short run, but in the long run they are betting on replacing your cable provider. Which is way more money than any content creator could make them. Why didn't they fight the adpocalypse? Why didn't they fight for their revenue stream? Because for their long term plans, this actually worked in YouTube's favor. It killed everyone's ad revenue, making them either: A) leave YouTube if YouTube didn't approve of them B) Gut the smaller creators it doesn't want C) Making creators it approves of easier to negotiate with as their profits took a hit. You will eventually see only content creators it (and the major TV networks and advertisers) approve of. You see this already, with crappy 'Entertainment Tonight' shit trending with 15k views. Hiring the ADL, TYT and (if true) FemFreq to monitor content again works for them. They are EXTREMELY heavy handed and will basically purge everything not to the left of Mao.

Google is a business. Yes, it has a progressive culture. But money comes first. TV is dying and Google seeks to upend it. Imagine once Google upends TV, and the major networks are on their side instead of a cable providers, the cable providers lose money and then they lose power. This has other benefits, such as Google Fiber being able to expand outwards to more cities. Now you get your TV and internet through one line and one company: Google. Will this work? Is this even their plan? I don't know. But it seems to me that this is the best way to boost profits, eliminate headaches, enhance their corporate muscle, defend against government fuckery and give them new areas to expand into that they were having trouble in before. Problem is that content creators are in their way. Ironically, YouTube is treating them like a cancer: Cut off the blood-flow, they'll wither up and die and replace it with something better and more profitable.

Alternatively, Google has lost its mind, has no plan and got fucktarded with progressive thinking and this will blow up in their face spectacularly. Or just result in the slow death of YouTube because they have no plan, YouTube Red and TV sucks and no one is buying it.

Google is a business, but it's following the exact same business paradigm as Twitter right now, and Twitter has been bleeding money out the ass for over a year and a half now, to the tune of being half a billion dollars down from 2015. So let's take a closer look at that and understand why this shit is doomed to fail, other than the obvious legal reasons already discussed (curated content like this opens Google up for lawsuits from two of the most litigious groups on the planet, the RIAA and MPAA, who fucking will do so).

The problem is one of demographics; at the end of the day, you need people to go to peruse your content to sell advertisements on or put curated content in, or you won't be making any cash at all, and that's the rub when it comes ot Social Justice. Youtube already operates at a loss, but it does so as a loss leader; it loses some cash to get everyone in the door and keep everything else running smoothly. When the Adpocalypse hit, Google wound up losing an unprecedented amount of money via advertisers simply fucking off. You can look at Gawker to have a good idea of how destructive that can be if they don't come back.

Now, I don't have the survey in front of me, but a widely-quoted one from a few years back says feminists account for about 18% of social media users. Note that that 18 percent accounts for both the not-insane ones and the lunatics we so enjoy watching. Social Justice Warriors, by all accounts, make up less than half of that number. This means that 91% of Social Media users are not fucking Social Justice Warriors, but that the policies being put forth by the big tech firms are designed specifically to appeal to a tiny minority of the userbase and literally no one else.

Can you see the problem with this yet?

That tiny minority of the userbase is being given full reign, and it shows - not only are the policies on Twitter right now specifically designed to appeal to them, but all curated content and "hot right now" articles show the same regressive leftist bullshit. In other words, Twitter's started a self-feeding cycle where they're constantly banning people in the name of the perpetually offended, and then being shocked, shocked I tells ya, when they don't have any ability whatsoever to maintain new users and they don't do shit about the literal millions of bots on their platform that account for more than 15% of the userbase. Even people who don't give one iota that lives down the street from a shit about politics can't fucking ignore this, because Twitter features "featured content" shit in its bar which is 90% Social Justice idiocy.

So how's that worked out for 'em?

Twitter has lost 17 executives within the last year, which means that over 60% of its executives have fucking fled the obviously sinking ship. Twitter is essentially committing economic suicide, focusing all efforts on criminalizing wrongthink while the platform itself continues to sink further and further into the red. A buyout or fire sale of Twitter's assets is going to happen if they don't turn shit around, but since Twitter is focused on fighting wrongthink, good fucking luck with that hot mess. It's a giant leaking ship right now that they're trying to act is still seaworthy while desperately trying to find someone to buy it.

Inevitably, Google's going to follow Twitter's path if they choose to go down that way, and they'll only have themselves to blame.
 
YouTube has had a plan in motion, for a long, long time now, to replace cable TV. I'm not talking about making content creators TV. It does not give one fuck about them, including PewDiePie. I am talking about CBS, NBC, ABC, all that shit. Instead of purchasing a Cable Plan, you'd purchase YouTube Tv. Now, advertisers need to run ads on those networks and those networks are now in association with YouTube. It needs to be cleansed of anything and everything they don't like.

YouTube has 0 interest in its content creators and has had for some time. It doesn't defend them, it feeds them to the wolves every time and only reluctantly does things when huge amounts of people annoy them. My guess is the goal is to side-step Netflix and Amazon Prime by just being TV itself because YouTube Red was a massive failure. Basically, YouTube Red showed Google that content creators alone won't cut it. And that it can make way more money partnered with TV networks and their advertisers, then risk some advertisers be on 'controversial' content and be displeased.

They will try to strangle off any sort of money, views or searches from anything remotely controversial in an effort to grab up more juicy and lucrative TV deals. More and more people are 'cord cutting', it is natural that these channels would want to survive. Trad cable operators suck. Everybody hates them and dealing with them and their shit. Getting basic cable for $35 bucks through Google, plus just buying HBO or Showtime's online plans individually is much more appealing. Not to mention imagine Google with TV muscle behind it. Becoming more advertiser friendly, friendly to TV networks, that gets Google a lot of pull. It pits the networks against the cable companies, threatens cable companies themselves and gives them even more power to fight off any swings at slowing down their content. You aren't going to want to throttle YouTube, because that pisses off Google AND like 20 major cable networks. Networks which you have to negotiate with and are currently fighting massive losses in subscribers. Not a situation you want to be in if you are a service provider. Cable companies would be more reluctant to throttle YouTube when it has those networks behind it.

In essence, it wants to ditch the creator model. Its tired of the headaches, its normie unfriendliness and advertiser unfriendliness. The problem is Google can't just do it overnight and say 'Thanks guys, but fuck off now'. They need some way of doing it slowly. The current political climate makes a decent distraction from basically excising almost everyone they don't like from the platform. It will lose them money for sure in the short run, but in the long run they are betting on replacing your cable provider. Which is way more money than any content creator could make them. Why didn't they fight the adpocalypse? Why didn't they fight for their revenue stream? Because for their long term plans, this actually worked in YouTube's favor. It killed everyone's ad revenue, making them either: A) leave YouTube if YouTube didn't approve of them B) Gut the smaller creators it doesn't want C) Making creators it approves of easier to negotiate with as their profits took a hit. You will eventually see only content creators it (and the major TV networks and advertisers) approve of. You see this already, with crappy 'Entertainment Tonight' shit trending with 15k views. Hiring the ADL, TYT and (if true) FemFreq to monitor content again works for them. They are EXTREMELY heavy handed and will basically purge everything not to the left of Mao.

Google is a business. Yes, it has a progressive culture. But money comes first. TV is dying and Google seeks to upend it. Imagine once Google upends TV, and the major networks are on their side instead of a cable providers, the cable providers lose money and then they lose power. This has other benefits, such as Google Fiber being able to expand outwards to more cities. Now you get your TV and internet through one line and one company: Google. Will this work? Is this even their plan? I don't know. But it seems to me that this is the best way to boost profits, eliminate headaches, enhance their corporate muscle, defend against government fuckery and give them new areas to expand into that they were having trouble in before. Problem is that content creators are in their way. Ironically, YouTube is treating them like a cancer: Cut off the blood-flow, they'll wither up and die and replace it with something better and more profitable.

Alternatively, Google has lost its mind, has no plan and got fucktarded with progressive thinking and this will blow up in their face spectacularly. Or just result in the slow death of YouTube because they have no plan, YouTube Red and TV sucks and no one is buying it.


You get it
 
Alternatively, Google has lost its mind, has no plan and got fucktarded with progressive thinking and this will blow up in their face spectacularly. Or just result in the slow death of YouTube because they have no plan, YouTube Red and TV sucks and no one is buying it.

I'm going to go with this, and that they somehow don't realize that if people wanted to watch TV, they'd watch TV. They don't seem to understand why their own business exists.
 
Youtube Red was a hilariously bad failure. Anyone know ballpark numbers of how much they've lost on it?

But yeah, I think you're right. After Red's failure, they realized they weren't gonna compete with Netflix/Hulu/Amazon. So going after TV is their next logical step. And they THINK that mass censoring via SJWs to cater to advertisers will be their ticket.

Pretty sure this is gonna backfire hard and they'll realize people aren't watching The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, and all those other cash-cow cable shows because of how left-leaning and SJW friendly they are...
 
Back