←back to thread

YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

(www.bbc.com)
296 points jakub_g | 10 comments | 24 Aug 25 10:37 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
Springtime ◴[25 Aug 25 07:07 UTC] No.45011126[source]▶
Youtube says this was done for select Youtube Shorts as a denoising process. However most popular channels on Youtube, which seem to be the pool selected for this experiment, typically already have well lit and graded videos shouldn't benefit much from extra denoising from a visual point of view.

It's true though that aggressive denoising gives things an artificially generated look since both processes use denoising heavily.

Perhaps this was done to optimize video encoding, since the less noise/surface detail there is the easier it is to compress.

replies(3): >>45011162 #>>45011186 #>>45011544 #
alex1138 ◴[25 Aug 25 07:17 UTC] No.45011186[source]▶
Can I just start a petition to remove Shorts entirely?
replies(4): >>45011216 #>>45011287 #>>45012294 #>>45014248 #
artninja1988 ◴[25 Aug 25 07:22 UTC] No.45011216[source]▶
Just don't watch them?
replies(4): >>45011252 #>>45011289 #>>45011478 #>>45016362 #
moi2388 ◴[25 Aug 25 07:29 UTC] No.45011252[source]▶
How does that remove them?
replies(1): >>45011685 #
exe34 ◴[25 Aug 25 08:44 UTC] No.45011685[source]▶
do you feel a need to stop other people doing things you personally don't like?
replies(3): >>45011917 #>>45012004 #>>45015171 #
animuchan[dead post] ◴[25 Aug 25 09:36 UTC] No.45012004[source]▶
[flagged]
exe34 ◴[25 Aug 25 11:09 UTC] No.45012566[source]▶
are they making you go on YouTube?
replies(2): >>45013007 #>>45024447 #
littlestymaar ◴[25 Aug 25 12:13 UTC] No.45013007[source]▶
Yes?

Until content start being published elsewhere it's fair to say we are forced to go to YouTube to access it.

replies(1): >>45014835 #
exe34 ◴[25 Aug 25 15:20 UTC] No.45014835[source]▶
who's forcing you?
replies(1): >>45016806 #
littlestymaar ◴[25 Aug 25 18:03 UTC] No.45016806[source]▶
Everyone who put mandatory stuff on YouTube and only here. Two last examples I faced recently:

- Companies who put their product instruction manual exclusively on YouTube

- university curriculum who require you to watch contain that is on YouTube only.

Sure I'm free not to buy any manufactured products or not resume my studies, but it's like saying the Gulag was OK because people were free not to criticize Stalin.

replies(1): >>45016944 #
1. exe34 ◴[25 Aug 25 18:11 UTC] No.45016944{3}[source]▶
the shorts are on the home page for doomscrolling. all the examples above will give you a playlist or will embed the videos in their pages. I don't see how shorts on the home page are a problem here? could you clarify please?
replies(1): >>45023633 #
2. littlestymaar ◴[26 Aug 25 08:05 UTC] No.45023633[source]▶
Funny how the “are they making you go on YouTube?” goalpost moved.
replies(1): >>45028453 #
3. exe34 ◴[26 Aug 25 16:06 UTC] No.45028453[source]▶
"going on YouTube" and complaining about shorts made it sound like you were going to the home page where shorts are shown as an option.

going on YouTube to watch a single video from a manual is a very different thing. I didn't move the goal post, I pointed out your motte and bailey position.

replies(1): >>45038286 #
4. littlestymaar ◴[27 Aug 25 11:41 UTC] No.45038286{3}[source]▶
There no motte, and no bailey, I never talked about shorts in the first place (surprise, there are multiple users on this platform …) I just witnessed your bad faith argument about how people aren't forced to go on YouTube and proved it wrong.

The key problem isn't that YouTube has been degrading its user experience for a while, the problem is that we don't have anywhere else to go as YouTube is the most encroached monopoly in the tech scene (which is no small feat).

replies(1): >>45039576 #
5. exe34 ◴[27 Aug 25 13:44 UTC] No.45039576{4}[source]▶
the whole conversation was about YouTube shorts. I was under the impression you were arguing in good faith - my bad.
replies(1): >>45039926 #
6. littlestymaar ◴[27 Aug 25 14:06 UTC] No.45039926{5}[source]▶
The fact the the conversation was previously about shorts doesn't excuse bad faith rhetorical questions like “are they making you go on YouTube?”.

The funny thing is that you never gave me a slight bit of impression that you were arguing in good faith, and now you whine about that.

replies(1): >>45041915 #
7. exe34 ◴[27 Aug 25 16:38 UTC] No.45041915{6}[source]▶
doesn't sound like you even know what good faith is.
replies(1): >>45045966 #
8. littlestymaar ◴[27 Aug 25 22:10 UTC] No.45045966{7}[source]▶
lol
replies(1): >>45051458 #
9. exe34 ◴[28 Aug 25 12:42 UTC] No.45051458{8}[source]▶
yes very funny.
replies(1): >>45074211 #
10. littlestymaar ◴[30 Aug 25 12:52 UTC] No.45074211{9}[source]▶
Ironic, rather.