zlacker

>>furcyd+(OP)
Ah, the classic “think of the children!” argument. It is no one’s responsibility other than the parent to ensure their child isn’t watching inappropriate content (which will be different for every family and individual).

This article suggests that machine learning and collaborative filtering are incapable of producing healthy recommendations. I beg to differ, the New York Times may not like the result but they work for the vast majority of users on any service with too much content to manually curate.

>>roster+gh
Setting aside the personal responsibility angle for the moment (which I agree with you on!) don't you think that negative externalities should generally be managed?

YouTube is a paperclip maximizer (where paperclips correspond to eyeball-hours spent watching YouTube) and at some point optimizing paperclips becomes orthogonal to human existence, and then anticorrelated with it.

I think it's a perfectly fair thing to say that maybe the negatives outweigh the positives at the present.

(This argument doesn't apply solely to YouTube, of course)