←back to thread

YouTube AI error costs creator his channel over alleged link to Japanese account

(piunikaweb.com)
111 points rabinovich | 3 comments | 04 Nov 25 16:36 UTC | HN request time: 0.017s | source
Show context
whatsupdog ◴[04 Nov 25 17:30 UTC] No.45813593[source]▶
How many such stories we have to come across before we as a community come together? Apple and Google's monopolies have to be broken. It's insane that your livelihood depends upon the mercy of one organization.
replies(7): >>45813707 #>>45813738 #>>45813747 #>>45813783 #>>45813826 #>>45814517 #>>45814521 #
MostlyStable ◴[04 Nov 25 17:41 UTC] No.45813707[source]▶
It's not really that simple. There are already alternative video hosting and streaming sites. In the article it mentions that this creator is already using one in fact. The reason why youtube is such a big deal is because of it's market dominance. Everyone watches there, and therefore it is valuable. "breaking it up" just turns it into another one of the many many competitors that already exist.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Youtube's behavior here. It's bad and shouldn't just be shrugged off. I just don't think that shouting "monopoly!" actually fixes anything. If you want a video hosting and streaming site that has less market dominance and better moderation policies, that already exists. Everyone is free to use them.

replies(3): >>45813771 #>>45813800 #>>45813966 #
cwillu ◴[04 Nov 25 17:47 UTC] No.45813771[source]▶
> "breaking it up" just turns it into another one of the many many competitors that already exist.

That's very much the point: collaring and tranquilizing the 900 pound gorilla in the room so that the reasons people might have to interact with the 30 other monkeys become relevant.

replies(1): >>45813896 #
1. MostlyStable ◴[04 Nov 25 17:57 UTC] No.45813896{3}[source]▶
Except that that still doesn't fix the problem. This behavior is downstream of bad laws and regulations. Do you think that Youtube wants to delete a random channel with hundreds of thousands of subscribers? No, that is obviously against it's interests. However, dealing with copyright law in intelligent, nuanced way is too expensive and difficult at scale, and so they resort to these very bad methods. There is a reason that they are probably the only profitable ad-supported platform. Right now, copyright holders aren't focusing on any of the other platforms because 99% of all activity is on youtube. If youtube went away, and the traffic was split up among the other competitors, the same bad dynamics would suddenly get pointed at them, and in 5-10 years we'd be having the same conversation.

You need to address the underlying causes of this kind of behavior.

replies(2): >>45814140 #>>45814377 #
2. conradfr ◴[04 Nov 25 18:17 UTC] No.45814140[source]▶
What constitutes "too expensive" for a company making more than $30B per year in profits?
3. cwillu ◴[04 Nov 25 18:36 UTC] No.45814377[source]▶
Nobody forced google to maintain a single coherent identity for users across all their services, such that a ban on one service risks impacts to several unrelated ones.