According to the article, the videos feature nudity and possibly sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is unfortunately a fact of life, and it’s probably better that children recognise it, and see it condemned in the media they watch, than not know what it is at all. And you would have to be a puritan to think that children seeing naked people is somehow so terrible.
If you bothered reading the very short article, it would be very clear that people are deliberately getting children subscribers than replacing the flow of new content with attempts to brainwash them or expose them to obscenity.
Imagine arguing that it’s actually good for kids to watch women being harassed. Peak incel.
edit: Dude is literally a “race realist”. lol smh.
Maybe they realize race is not a biological term but rather a racist term. It’s a way to distinguish us from them because we are darker or are shorter or taller than the standard sized/colored/shaped group.
Race does not equal species. We are all one single species, the homosapiens.
So Elsagate never stopped?
This has to be a state actor thing, nobody else has the resources to deploy such a long lasting and changing content farm. Some psyops to fuck future generations of adults up?
Again?
Meanwhile I can’t even upload commercials for archival purposes without getting copyright strikes on my account. How is YouTube so bad at this.
Because that’s the way the legal system works.
“Oops, had some harmful/illegal content on there? Nobody was /really/ hurt, or at least, we weren’t directly causing harm. I’ll take it down and eat a small fine.
Vs
“Oh I’m sorry, I’ll take down the 30s clip of your 90s movie. it has caused you 3million in damages? I’m so sorry, here’s some tools that will automate detection and removal of your property. I’m so sorry”
Copyright protection is easy. Detection of novel forms of obscenity is hard.
I’d argue it’s extremely hard, even.
You know, as much as I hate it… “you know it when you see I but hard to definet” really is accurate.
There’s plenty of things that aren’t outright illegal that are completely inappropriate around children.
And if there are things that are context specific, it gets a lot harder to make a computer recognize a problem.
Audio cues are easy to scan for and computers are pretty good at recognizing sounds, especially in regards to copyright detection (even if their interpretation of “fair use” clause is still fucked 6 ways)
Video is a lot harder unless the computer is trying to match direct images (it’s a lot easier to recognize a still frame from The Avengers when it’s uploaded full size than it is to recognize a slightly warped, smaller cropped version with someone in front of it commenting on the video)
Again, or still?
