YouTube Will Remind Users To 'Keep Comments Respectful' Before Posting (engadget.com) 117
YouTube is taking new steps to weed out bullying, hate speech and other kinds of nasty comments. From a report: The company introduced a new feature that will remind users to "keep comments respectful," when its automated systems detect a comment may be offensive. The change is rolling out now on Android, and will eventually move to other platforms, though it's not clear when. The feature is similar to one recently implemented by Instagram. Before a comment is posted, a pop-up will appear with a reminder to "keep comments respectful." The user will then be able to edit the comment or post it anyway. The company notes that seeing the reminder doesn't necessarily mean a comment has violated its rules or that it will be removed. The update is part of a larger effort by YouTube to reduce hate speech and make its platform more equitable for all its creators. In addition to the new pop-ups, it will also test a new feature for YouTube Studio that automatically filters out "potentially inappropriate and hurtful comments" to make it easier for video creators to avoid seeing them.
Good to know (Score:4, Funny)
Have to refresh my euphemisms.
Re: Good to know (Score:1)
I prefer going back to the roots, mah Moors!
(The Moors were a great north-African people. The term came to be generalized to all "people from Africa" by Europeans, for convenience. Like Slavs call Germans some form of Nemecki, because that was the German tribe they first encountered.
If you thought of racism there, *you* thought of racism.)
Re: (Score:2)
The Slavs call the Germans "Nemci" and the language "Nemski" not because of some tribe, but because the languages are so different that the Slavs said these people were mute (not able to speak). "Nem" or "Niam" is the Slavic word for "mute".
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki... [wiktionary.org]
Man, you should pay me for correcting your ignorance. First on world (over)population now regarding Slavic languages. I am from a Slavic country and I am extremely well read, so I cannot let ignorance pass by unchallenged. It's the bane
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.theonion.com/youtu... [theonion.com]
Brilliant! (Score:5, Funny)
That will definitely make those nasty trolls reform themselves immediately. /s
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It does not have to, Youtube shadow deletes. Write your comment, no complaint, comment just accepted and then disappeared. Try type in Uncle Tom Obama enter in the comment and then try to edit it, not longer there gone.
Google are scummy cunts, right into disappearing people off any part of the internet they control, real slimy scummy cunts. Truly are a loathsome corporation, just disgusting.
Related XKCD... (Score:4, Insightful)
It won't stop anyone who has wholly embraced toxicity, but maybe there's hope for the marginally-self-aware.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Related XKCD... (Score:3)
Funny, until you find that you are the one banned. Even though you know for a fact that it was not on you. Because you haven't seen one of those YT "morons", until you have seen them in a position of reporting you by the masses, being a forum "moderator", or being a YT policy writer.
Good luck trying to conform to a group that demands drawing a single dot inside of seven billion circles at once, when at least a thousand separate subsets of those are not overlapping.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, until you find that you are the one banned.
You are the world's most delicate snowflake, seriously. You think that hearing your own comments aloud so you might accidentally engage your brain and think about them is "banning". Bloody hell how do you survive day to day with a skin so thin it's transparent?
Re: (Score:2)
He's the guy who storms out of the golf club, bent 4 iron in hand, ranting about the 1st Amendment and the size of his handicap.
Like the stereotypical hypocritical Christian (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Since when was asking people to be civil at a private venue some radial woke concept?
Re: (Score:1)
Because political correctness is simply polite tyranny.
Re: (Score:2)
polite tyranny
An interesting concept, given that I've always considered tyranny to be inherently impolite. I would suggest that a "tyrant" that is merely asking politely is no tyrant at all since you can always just say no. Preferably politely.
And sure, actual tyrants could adopt a veneer of politeness, but they have no need to do so, because they're tyrants, and I can't think of any that have bothered to do so.
Re: (Score:1)
But if you can be easily manipulated into doing things that go against your best interests, simply by having someone define you as being "rude", and trying to socially shame you...
This is the problem the Republicans have had for DECADES.
They try to take a strong stand.
Their opponents try to socially shame them by defining their ideas as "bad", "rude", "evil", etc.
They, consequently shit out their spines, then give in.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if that were true, there's a world of difference between that and the dictatorship, secret police, death camps and suchlike that one would usually associate with tyranny. If you really think that a request for politeness is equivalent to that then you've lost all sense of perspective.
Re: (Score:1)
Even if that were true
It *IS* true.
Because it's then used as a pretext to attack and disenfranchise.
Re: (Score:2)
To be clear, the part of your statement that i was doubting with the "even if that were true" is the suggestion that Republicans have allowed themselves to be silenced. Admittedly I'm looking at this from an ocean away, but the Republican party (or at least, its leaders) strike me as some of the more shameless people in the world. And I'm not just talking about Trump; he's merely the most egregious example of where the Republicans have been heading for quite some time.
Also, nobody has been disenfranchised
Re: (Score:1)
If you're looking at the current Republican party, you've missed the impact of what I've said.
I'm speaking on Republicans between the Bush Sr. and the Obama era.
Essentially these are the people who, at the first push-back, would shit out their spines and cave.
They can only be shamed into not admitting who they voted for.
You've said it right there.
They're silenced. This is happening across the country. It's happening on college campuses.
And any time they DO talk about it, or about their basic principles, they're attacked.
I dunno where YOU live, but over here, people
Re: (Score:2)
If you're looking at the current Republican party
I was quite explicit that I was not.
I'm speaking on Republicans between the Bush Sr. and the Obama era.
Essentially these are the people who, at the first push-back, would shit out their spines and cave.
Wait, what? Are you seriously trying to argue that any criticism at all of Republicans constitutes tyranny because they're such a bunch of grade A snowflakes that they just can't take it?
Anyway, moving swiftly on, it seems you're talking about the more moderate kind of Republicans, who've been in decline for the past couple of decades, or at least pushed to the margins. I was talking about the tea-party/Trumpian style Republicans who rose to dominate the Republican part
Re: (Score:1)
I was not (looking at the current Republican party)
Hence my point.
Wait, what? Are you seriously trying to argue that any criticism at all of Republicans constitutes tyranny because they're such a bunch of grade A snowflakes that they just can't take it?
No. Try actually READING what I said.
A certain segment of the RNC has tried appeasement.
It has NEVER worked as the DNC asks for an inch, takes a mile, then asks for another inch. EVERY TIME.
And no, it has nothing to do with the actual Republican platform, and moderate/radical/etc.
It has to do with INDIVIDUALS who were simply spine-free in dealing with any sort of political opposition.
I was responding to your claims of disenfranchisement
You responded. The problem is, you think the disenfranchisement stops at the ballot box.
Robust debate
Doesn't happen when
Re: (Score:2)
No. Try actually READING what I said.
I did try reading, but you haven't explained how alleged Republican spinelessness is evidence of tyranny. Seems to me that if they're as spineless as you say then they'd capitulate without any tyranny at all.
The problem is, you think the disenfranchisement stops at the ballot box.
No I don't, your vote has to count for something as well, which is why I believe in electoral reform. But the franchise is ultimately just about voting. There is more to democracy than voting though.
Robust debate
Doesn't happen when, by simply trying to discuss things, you open yourself up to very real-world attacks. Being PHYSICALLY attacked is only the tip of the iceberg. You have whackjobs out there stalking you, doxxing you, trying to get you fired and thrown off various platforms, destroying your businesses, etc.
Some fair points here. Stalking and doxing are tantamount to physical threats, and people should gene
Re: Like the stereotypical hypocritical Christian (Score:2)
Most of the most famous serial killers didn't come after their victims right away wearing a hockey mask and brandishing a giant chainsaw.
Instead, the looked like the "perfectly normal" upstanding citizen.
It's wasn't until they get the victim they lured alone and into the basement that they turned into $HORROR_MOVIE_PSYCHO_OF_CHOICE.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Like the stereotypical hypocritical Christian (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The government owns YouTube now? When did this happen?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Curious to hear your legal theory as to why it being a public venue or whatever your definition is matters here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Okay but in the context of freedom of speech and or Section 230 protection what is your legal theory?
Re: (Score:2)
That YouTube is a public venue is my only assertion all the way back to my first post. I thought I had made that clear. Can you point out where I made any - unsubstantiated or not - claims regarding Section 230 or freedom of speech?
Re: (Score:2)
I never said it must be publicly owned. I'm asking what, in legal terms, you think YouTube is and what legal theory you have that benefits from that designation.
Re: (Score:2)
I never said it must be publicly owned. I'm asking what, in legal terms, you think YouTube is and what legal theory you have that benefits from that designation.
Sigh...
AmiMoJo: Since when was asking people to be civil at a private venue some radial [SIC] woke concept?
NagrothAgain: Youtube isn't a Private Venue.
AmiMoJo: The government owns YouTube now? When did this happen?
fuzznutz: Don't confuse public with publicly owned.
There are distinctions between public but privately owned, private and publicly owned venues. Period. Section 230 involves immunity from liability for user contributed content. I made no claims of what that content should or should not be nor any claims of legal benefits one way or another. You asking me to defend an argument I did not make is pointless.
Re: (Score:2)
You seen to be confusing my question to you with a statement.
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly haven't read many youtube comments.
Oh, great! - our CorpDragon AI-Nannie,.. (Score:2, Funny)
Too many times I've run into Witch-programmed AIs that do the equivalent of screeching and acting like an evil crack-head syphilitic granny-in-law, that sits around your apartment, screeching and pissing herself whenever you Say or Hear something she doesn't like, and tries to cut your tongue out, your ears off, in the middle of the night
.
Want more Adult comments?
https://www.facebook.com/Steve... [facebook.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Oh, great! - our CorpDragon AI-Nannie,.. (Score:2)
She also collects dead cat carcasses, locks her grandchildren in the basement and forces them to write essays on Bible chapters, and slips her tongue into young womens' mouths when giving them a 'friendly' kiss.
China -n- YouTube (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No, China has one hundred thousand human reviewers/censors. On the other hand, Google and Youtube have a combined workforce of about two human reviewers/censors.
Totes effective (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I am sure this will be just effective as the "Please confirm that you are over 18" click through found on alcohol and porn websites.
What kind of porn do you get when you say that you are under the age of 18?
Re: (Score:2)
Some sites used to redirect you to yahoo or Disney.
Then I realized I didn't have to tell the truth on the internet.
Re: Totes effective (Score:2)
Jeez, Disney? That is just ... cruel!
*laughs in Mr. Mouse, axe murderer*
Re: (Score:2)
See Guile and watch his knee grow! (Score:2)
Re: See Guile and watch his knee grow! (Score:2)
The problem is that if you go all-in , there *is nothing* left.
Shoule be Rule 66: Whatever you say or do, there is somebody mortally offended by it.
((And making the blind mob maim you socially and psychologically. Because quick death is not painful enough.)
Damn, in the 80s I thought we would have evolved a bit in the 2020s...
Fuck you, youtube! (Score:2)
Don't tell me what to do!
Re: (Score:1)
Came here for this, waa not disappointed. +1.
If you don't agree with me, you are toxic (Score:1)
Again, filtering comments assumes that you are incapable of ignoring shit you don't like. These platforms that want to control your language always, inevitably control opinion instead.
And if your skin is so thin and your maturity level is so low that you can't ignore and then suffer some mental harm because "bad guy says bad things" then the filters should really be aimed at you.
Re: (Score:1)
You could simply ignore the whole comments section, which may be the wisest move. But for those brave enough to read below the fold, how can you actually ignore a comment? Unlike a video, article or link, which may discarded based on title, headline or thumbnail, a short comment must be wholly consumed to be evaluated. Once read, it will have some effect on one's thought patterns, however minuscule. Browsing a thousand tiny nuggets of rudeness, negativity and hate, over and over and over, will eventually re
Re: (Score:1)
Re: If you don't agree with me, you are toxic (Score:2)
We are the Buddy Bears, we always get along!...If you don't agree, that just means that you are wrong!..
Ha Ha Hahah Ha ha Haha (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: if it's a nag popup (Score:2)
Wow, just like those "This site uses cookies"..."Your head will explode if you turn the volume too high" boxes.
I guess the poindexters behind this never heard of "dialog fatigue".
Just more garbage and Javashit abuse to have to try and filter out. :[
don't be a cunt (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you ever answer n? (Score:2)
This program posts news to thousands of machines throughout the entire civilized world. Your message will cost the net hundreds if not thousands of dollars to send everywhere. Please be sure you know what you are doing. Are you absolutely sure that you want to do this? [y / n]
Seems like a feature for "Youtubers". (Score:2)
This seems less like a feature that may be a social experiment to see how effective it is if at all. I'm sure it will be partially effective but trolls will simply ignore it. However, I'm guessing they developed this to enable "Youtubes" to filter out disrespectful comments. Comments do have an impact and could discourage posters from making future videos to post. The more artisan made content they have, the greater the appeal and thus the more people will watch their advertisement driven platform.
This is patently ridiculous. (Score:3)
The comments on youtube are some of the most scathingly horrible things on the internet. Reminding those poster to be respectful is tantamount to walking up to a missile launcher about to go off and politely asking it to not continue the launch sequence. Completely wasted effort.
Re: (Score:2)
They have improved over the last few years. Google seems to demote comments full of swearing and vitriol.
Twitter does it too. The comments are still there but most people don't scroll down that far.
Hate Speech? (Score:1)
The problem with hate speech is that defining it is purely subjective (and often racist).
Case in point, Blacks can use the N word all day long and nobody calls it hate speech, but if someone with any other color skin uses it.... Well..
What you consider "hate" I might just call "bad taste".
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but for black folks saying it it's an insult on the same level as me and my white friends constantly calling each other dumbasses. Even an insult can become an affectation in the right context.
Re: (Score:2)
I never understood the appeal for suburban white dudes trying to adopt themselves into hip-hop culture at that level. Nowadays somebody would scream cultural appropriation at them until they stopped. Back then everybody just shrugged and tried to ignore them. Or teased them relentlessly. But then we sorta teased everybody at the time.
Re: (Score:1)
What?
No, not always. Saying, "yo my n*gger!", or something to that effect is neither racist nor an insult.
I hear this all day long, every day, have for years. It doesn't even register when a person of color uses it that way, and that's 99.8% of the way I hear it used.
It certainly still gets my attention used any other way, but you can't claim it's always an insult or racist. There are more usages. It's a lot like, "fuck", in that regard.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's an insult when black people use the N word, too. It's just not racist.
That's my point. It is to you. Not to many blacks. Maybe not even to the majority (I don't have any data on the percentages). Most people's definition of the N-word would be racist. i.e. "It's okay for blacks to say it, but not whites (or Asians or Mexicans, ad inf). That's one of the paradoxes of most modern definitions of "hate speech". The permissions and prohibitions on certain types of speech are limited to certain races, ethnicity, genders, etc etc. That is, it's okay for this group but not for
YouTube Comments (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It's not like much important goes on in YT comments other than tribal posturing of one kind or another, maybe
Hmz.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Also, your tag could push down salaries for senior FAANG gigs that command $1-3 megabucks in the US per levels.fyi and that guy making $2M gross after only 6 years.
Reward with endorphins injection (Score:1)
Soon there will be rewards by social media for people who dont rage or troll with an endorphins injection; better known as "likes" . After that there will be equity in the injections; its not fair that X's post is just as respectful as Y's post so they need to equalize the injections and ensure there is equity of outcome so everyone can enjoy lots of injections. It wont matter that someones post is intellectually superior to the others as as long as everyone gets equal reward. Everyone's a winner baby!!
I have seen their tyranny, first hand. (Score:2)
And it is an infinite cavalcade of a tiggered mob of mental four-year-olds, channeled by a blind spineless corporate clickwhore king.
Banning works auomatically, no matter what they tell you. You will never see anything that is not generated from a template or isn't in the form of a FAQ of cheerfully-worded calling you a piece of shit for daring to demand accountability.
And banning happens, whenever enough immatures have been triggered and report you to the GestapoAI. The likeliness of which, statistically,
Start with the anti-vaccers please (Score:2)
If they refuse to control this single issue, their credibility is null.
Re: (Score:2)
If they started pushing out anti-vaxxers and flat earthers they'd lose about half their revenue stream.
Re: (Score:2)
True.. and Don't forget the "tRump won the election" crew
Re: Start with the anti-vaccers please (Score:2)
You mean the crew that just dropped a video of them kicking the majority of poll workers and all poll watchers out in Georgia before pulling out 4 hidden boxes and continuing to count for 2 hours? That crew?
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Is there video somewhere?
Re: (Score:1)
People are entitled to their opinions no matter how crazy.
Best for them to let us know so we don't have to guess.
fyi, having bs opinions isn't rude or disrespectful, how you express them can be.
Re: (Score:1)
God I hate the kiljoys that do this stuff (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
The internet just isn't enjoyable anymore. It's filled with clout chasing morons looking for celebrity, no one just does anything for fun anymore. Too much ego, too many people looking for reasons to get upset, too many dickheads in positions that think they have any leg to stand on policing it all. Let's just go back to segmented community PHP forums, it was way better.
This.
We now realize in the end that social media did little more than infect society with mass narcissism, leading to the incredulous attitudes we now find today online. It's so bad that Attention Whore is now a valid career that we reward handsomely if you're really good at it. It's no surprise how we got here, and what caused it.
Problem is, there's too much money in peddling narcissism and caustic shit-slinging. Content is irrelevant when every click goes "ka-ching!" in the bank for them. I wouldn't t
Re: God I hate the kiljoys that do this stuff (Score:2)
Yeah, we have too many do gooders trying to suck the life out of the entire world and turn it into Earth- As Run By Ned Flanders.
And we have racist morons that is giving them excuses to do so. :\
Unsorry, but I prefer the grown up internet where my feelings could get hurt (Yikes!), than the one covered in bubble wrap and pads, and I have to wear a helmet before I am allowed on.
I have a better idea (Score:2)
Remind user to watch the video till the end before commenting. How many times have I corrected someone only to find out he corrects himself just a second later...
So..... (Score:2)
If I see something that is completely evil, and wrong, I should say:
"Well gee golly. That nice gentleman really should not have blugeoned those 2 poor women to death. He should've handled his quarrel in an upright, civilized manner"
instead of my usual
"That evil piece of shit! Death is too good for him! I hope he gets ass raped behind bars for the rest of his fucking life!"
?
More biased censoring. (Score:1)
Anyone who posts youtube comments have noticed and complained for months that youtube is auto removing comments for no good reason. While trolls abuse the reporting system to ban people for calling people out on their bs. It's so easy to get banned yet so hard to get unbanned. I've never heard of anyone who got unbanned. Not a single one.
To work around the auto censoring people have started to encode their comments and obfuscate them in several ways.
Youtube is a user hostile platform filled to the brim with
Respectful? HAHAHAAAA... (Score:1)