💰 Grifter "Mad at the Internet" - a/k/a My Psychotherapy Sessions

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Destacado
I bet Josh caught COVID but refuses to take a test for fear that he is wrong again, child.

edit: just saw the archive of the 5 minute stream. I see that I, in fact, was the one who was wrong! He took the coof test and it came back negative.
 
Última edición:
Useful_Mistake dijo:
The algorithm is the sole creation of the platforms. It is their way of showing you what content it deems you need to see. The argument goes that this way the harm is not done by a third party (which doesn't even have any control over the algorithm), but by the platform itself. If memory serves, this is the first court that found that this argument had merit.
Presiona para expandir...
It seems a very... strange argument. If you watched nothing but My Little Pony shit on YouTube, that's what "the algorithm" would feed you. Garbage in, garbage out. That's pretty well every social media site. It depends on what you tell the machine.

My question is how does this affect the farms?
 
WelperHelper99 dijo:
If you watched nothing but My Little Pony shit on YouTube, that's what "the algorithm" would feed you.
Presiona para expandir...
Yeah, but Alphabet specifically designed the algorithm to work a specific way. If it lead you to a content that harmed you, it would be weird to say Alphabet had no direct action. That doesn't necessarily mean that it would end up liable in the end, but the argument doesn't seem outrageous.

Put it another way, if Alphabet designs an algorithm specifically to promote/teach/do illegal activity, it would be weird to totally insulate it from the underlying crimes.

Of course, my hypothetical is super specific, and not that easily applicable, but you get the idea.

I don't think this will survive on appeal though unless the evidence presented was really good.

WelperHelper99 dijo:
My question is how does this affect the farms?
Presiona para expandir...
I don't see how it affects the farms at all. The only similar feature would be the feature system, but that can only be done by Mods, so if anyone were to sue for something written in a feature, 230 wouldn't apply.
 
WelperHelper99 dijo:
If you watched nothing but My Little Pony shit on YouTube, that's what "the algorithm" would feed you.
Presiona para expandir...
Except it wouldn't for YouTube. Retention is the name of the game and there are only so much related MLP content on a platform--as well as only so much as any one individual actually wants to consume. The algo will start spitting related trash towards you to try and keep you there. Occasionally it will spit seemingly random content that users like you clicked on, or other viral content to keep you there. If you interact with that content you get more tailored, but broader shit. Potentially "harmful" content starts being fed to you as you engage. The algo is strong. What you're describing is how the algo worked in its infancy. As it's automated and the user chooses what to click on I still don't really buy their argument, it seems to be a stretch. KF is unaffected whichever way this goes.
 
Useful_Mistake dijo:
Yeah, but Alphabet specifically designed the algorithm to work a specific way. If it lead you to a content that harmed you, it would be weird to say Alphabet had no direct action. That doesn't necessarily mean that it would end up liable in the end, but the argument doesn't seem outrageous.

Put it another way, if Alphabet designs an algorithm specifically to promote/teach/do illegal activity, it would be weird to totally insulate it from the underlying crimes.

Of course, my hypothetical is super specific, and not that easily applicable, but you get the idea.

I don't think this will survive on appeal though unless the evidence presented was really good.
Presiona para expandir...
I guess that makes some sense. The one outlier I find is 4chan. People (and feds) post shit. It then gets bumped up and down based on activity, and eventually fades away when it hits the bump limit or the mods will it. That seems more like random activity than a algorithm.
Useful_Mistake dijo:
I don't see how it affects the farms at all. The only similar feature would be the feature system, but that can only be done by Mods, so if anyone were to sue for something written in a feature, 230 wouldn't apply.
Presiona para expandir...
Well that is good to know.
 
Glock 19 Gen 5 dijo:
Except it wouldn't for YouTube. Retention is the name of the game and there are only so much related MLP content on a platform--as well as only so much as any one individual actually wants to consume. The algo will start spitting related trash towards you to try and keep you there. Occasionally it will spit seemingly random content that users like you clicked on, or other viral content to keep you there. If you interact with that content you get more tailored, but broader shit. Potentially "harmful" content starts being fed to you as you engage. The algo is strong. What you're describing is how the algo worked in its infancy. As it's automated and the user chooses what to click on I still don't really buy their argument, it seems to be a stretch. KF is unaffected whichever way this goes.
Presiona para expandir...
I mean somewhat. It depends I'd say in how old your account is tbh. I've had mine for at least a decade. I get a few random recommendations still, but even then, it's in topics I'm interested in. In order to get youtube to pump out, idk, isis beheading videos, I'd have to manually, deliberately, punch that in. It knows I don't want that and have zero interest. My point is the guy chose to radicalize himself.
 
Honestly I feel like being sick and only doing one stream this week is a decent enough way for Null to transition into doing the one-a-week streams he talked about before, personally I enjoy longer streams that go into more detail and encapsulate more information (which hopefully would be the compromise when dear feeder begins doing it once a week) and we've already gone a week or so without the grand media empire of Mad At The Internet burning down
 
I archived the video Josh uploaded to Twitter/Telegram, Elon's version was 720p for some reason so this is technically the second upload. YouTube archive of Sick on the Internet (March 19, 2024):


Get better soon Dear Feeder!
 
The flu gave Josh a pleasant radio voice, though I imagine it'd eventually degrade into wheezing and hoarseness if he tried to do it for the usual two hours. Get well soon, congrats on the Epik win.
 
Useful_Mistake dijo:
Yeah, but Alphabet specifically designed the algorithm to work a specific way. If it lead you to a content that harmed you, it would be weird to say Alphabet had no direct action. That doesn't necessarily mean that it would end up liable in the end, but the argument doesn't seem outrageous.

Put it another way, if Alphabet designs an algorithm specifically to promote/teach/do illegal activity, it would be weird to totally insulate it from the underlying crimes.

Of course, my hypothetical is super specific, and not that easily applicable, but you get the idea.

I don't think this will survive on appeal though unless the evidence presented was really good.


I don't see how it affects the farms at all. The only similar feature would be the feature system, but that can only be done by Mods, so if anyone were to sue for something written in a feature, 230 wouldn't apply.
Presiona para expandir...
Although, doesn't this miss the forest for the trees?

Say somebody does a heckin' murderino and says "I was told to by this Youtube channel." Don't you have to prove the speech provided by the channel goes beyond first amendment protections and becomes incitement to violence?

So then, isn't it even further removed to try to classify what the algorithm does as "speech" and then prove that its vague suggestion to watch various other videos somehow also constitutes incitement?

Or is this not a speech issue?
 
Please stay alive Null so you can give me more of those special secret trophy stickers.
 
Destacado
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo