Heads up for any content creators on You Tube

[Cugino83]

Interesting they have manage to give the account back to the people that ware banned, and even if a bit, let's say, "colorful" expression in my option SA have a point: as much ad YT grow as a video content platform there will be more of this problem, addressing them in the right waay and in a user frendly way is mandatory, BigG really need to impement a more leveled policy about content control, I mean if for a simple emoticon message you get you whole account nuked, what if you post a video inciting violonce, racism act, ped-pronograpy etc???

Such nuking action has to be apply with a really control and serius human supervision and only to the case that have heavy and serius law braking behavior.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Interesting they have manage to give the account back to the people that ware banned, and even if a bit, let's say, "colorful" expression in my option SA have a point: as much ad YT grow as a video content platform there will be more of this problem, addressing them in the right waay and in a user frendly way is mandatory, BigG really need to impement a more leveled policy about content control, I mean if for a simple emoticon message you get you whole account nuked, what if you post a video inciting violonce, racism act, ped-pronograpy etc???

Such nuking action has to be apply with a really control and serius human supervision and only to the case that have heavy and serius law braking behavior.

The interesting thing is on the Twitter the original youtuber who raised this issue asked directly what was with not only suspending a user from YouTube, but disabling all access to all Google services via their linked Google Account - There has been no answer to this beyond "We are investigating".

As stated from my own personal expiriance the nuclear option of removing someone from their services is wielded in what would appear to be unexceptional circumstances, such as being engaged in a streamers chat and spamming those hearts or putting a joke middle name on your Google Plus.

I have no idea why Goog is getting angry with this? I assume it's interfering with some algorithm or data-set they would rather not have messed up to the point where they are more than happy to remove the user and their data from the system entirely rather than have their electronic footprint pollute the pool. It's an assumption, but it's the only thing that makes sense to me to have this as the reaction to otherwise such trifling actions. Yes I understand it is their service and they say what goes, but there comes a point where you wonder whats the motive to make the delete key the default response?

I love the film Tank Girl from 1995. In it, at the beginning, the title character explains the world and how a company, "Water and Power" took control of the world when an asteroid strike caused global drought "They control most of the water... and got all the power". In this Account Ban case the quote can be easily bastardised to "They control most of the services... and got all the power".

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vRc1vD6k8I

 

[Vavrik]

Understand the decision is not made by a human. It's an AI, and this is AI at it's best (Google is one of the industry leaders). You'll find that there's a number, probably 3 or 5, something like that the AI was using as it's limit. Look for this happening at your bank when you try to pay a bill that's uncharacteristic for you. Transaction refused. You get a notice in your text messages or e-mail. Your account is frozen until you jump through a couple of hoops. It happened to me the last time I bought something from CIG.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Understand the decision is not made by a human. It's an AI, and this is AI at it's best (Google is one of the industry leaders). You'll find that there's a number, probably 3 or 5, something like that the AI was using as it's limit. Look for this happening at your bank when you try to pay a bill that's uncharacteristic for you. Transaction refused. You get a notice in your text messages or e-mail. Your account is frozen until you jump through a couple of hoops. It happened to me the last time I bought something from CIG.

I see your angle but that only accounts for the initial issue of accounts being flagged for potential missuse of the system.

I appreciate and understand that there is no way Goog and YouTube can monitor all content and have to have something to do that, their systems can't just be left to go to rack and ruin at the hands of bored internet users so that means leaving it to automation to make judgements in the vast amount of cases.

It's probable there are little to no front line moderators anymore leaving it all to the computers considering the amount of content being generated every single second - the streamer himself says he has his own troop of volunteer moderators who got on this issue within an hour and a half of it coming to light, and who knows if he didn't have them in place maybe it never would have...?

But the option to delete account access to every single service without checking for context of the offense was not put there by the AI. Someone somewhere ticked a box and signed off that this system was capable enough to be allowed to do that automatically. The appeals system also appears to have decreed that in this context according to the rules they have to judge things by it was justified - again something someone would have to have signed off on before they were distributed to the appeals system teams.

There are so, so many variables I am quite confident in saying they may likely have not seen this coming - Who would have thought "What if a streamer encourages thousands and thousands of their viewers to spam a certain colour Emoji?" it's just not something you're likely to think about, I'm not that ticked off about the fact it went wrong, mistakes happen and no intelligence machine or otherwise is infallible... I'm ticked off about removal of ALL services being a default automated option.

At least in my expiriance from 2011, I had instructions to follow to get my accounts back and working - remove the made up middle-name from Google Plus and send them my photo ID. I did this (yes on a goog server somewhere is my photo ID, I bet I look young) and didn't permanently loose access to my Google Services, but many people didn't and lost their access to all services until Google finally backed down. Now it looks like it's an automatic default, not advice, not a warning, not a threat. The default.

I'm not against AI and there are so many variables for AI to take into account it's not surprising that it sometimes makes the wrong call... we all do, that's existence. It's how those failures are remedied that makes the difference between "well, no problem stuff happens I'll forget about this in a months time" and "I have lost trust no matter how well intentioned your actions were"

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUQgthIs7pM

 

[Cugino83]

I have no idea why Goog is getting angry with this? I assume it's interfering with some algorithm or data-set they would rather not have messed up to the point where they are more than happy to remove the user and their data from the system entirely rather than have their electronic footprint pollute the pool. It's an assumption, but it's the only thing that makes sense to me to have this as the reaction to otherwise such trifling actions. Yes I understand it is their service and they say what goes, but there comes a point where you wonder whats the motive to make the delete key the default response?

If that is realy the case this is bad: as a leader on the programming seasrch engine and AI a behavior like this is like an ostrich hiding his head undergroud: problem has to be fixed, not hide under the rug.
As for "their services, theyr rule"... well when you became a superpower like BigG this start to fade since your services impact a lots if industries in the word, so you need to be extra cereful about what you do.

Understand the decision is not made by a human. It's an AI, and this is AI at it's best (Google is one of the industry leaders). You'll find that there's a number, probably 3 or 5, something like that the AI was using as it's limit. Look for this happening at your bank when you try to pay a bill that's uncharacteristic for you. Transaction refused. You get a notice in your text messages or e-mail. Your account is frozen until you jump through a couple of hoops. It happened to me the last time I bought something from CIG.

Of course the decision is made by an AI that, for as advanced as it is, work for algorithm, but if a service desk receive few hundered of complain for the same ban is your duty to look into it, manually, serriusly and by a human being, not simply dismiss it like has been done.
That sayed considering the broad of BigG services and the importance that they have in a daily live of milions of people, a complete ban form the Goggle platform should alwasy been reviewed by a competent human becouse this decision have a severe impact, not doing that is a really big lack of responsability, something that company "over the top" like Google, Facebook, Amanzon and similar can't allow on theyr services.

 

[mindfart]

It got mostly sorted, and youtube says it is improving their systems (including the appeal process)

View: https://youtu.be/Mhb4CvOtEeo

 

[Bambooza]

If that is realy the case this is bad: as a leader on the programming seasrch engine and AI a behavior like this is like an ostrich hiding his head undergroud: problem has to be fixed, not hide under the rug.
As for "their services, theyr rule"... well when you became a superpower like BigG this start to fade since your services impact a lots if industries in the word, so you need to be extra cereful about what you do.



Of course the decision is made by an AI that, for as advanced as it is, work for algorithm, but if a service desk receive few hundered of complain for the same ban is your duty to look into it, manually, serriusly and by a human being, not simply dismiss it like has been done.
That sayed considering the broad of BigG services and the importance that they have in a daily live of milions of people, a complete ban form the Goggle platform should alwasy been reviewed by a competent human becouse this decision have a severe impact, not doing that is a really big lack of responsability, something that company "over the top" like Google, Facebook, Amanzon and similar can't allow on theyr services.

And this is how giants fall. Honestly, if Alphabet makes to many missteps they can go the way of Yahoo and MySpace.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

It got mostly sorted, and youtube says it is improving their systems (including the appeal process)

View: https://youtu.be/Mhb4CvOtEeo

Many thanks for the update, just back from work. Good to see there has been tangible progress, a lot of work already put in and a lot of action achieved.

Good stuff, will be interesting to see what lessons are learned in the long run.