zlacker

>>furcyd+(OP)
I don't know if YouTube's problems are so bad that the argument applies in this case, but in general, "We can't comply with this regulation, it would be too difficult at our scale" is not considered a valid defense. Just as banks shouldn't be allowed to get so large that they can't fail without wreaking havoc on the economy, if algorithmic recommendation and moderation can't work, then maybe social networks shouldn't be allowed to get so large that human moderation is not possible.

>>Analem+6j
The queue for getting your video posted on YouTube would grow infinitely. (Or, more realistically, people would give up and not bother once it takes years.)

But I guess they could charge money to get to the head of the line?

>>skybri+hk
The queue for having your video uploaded and public does not at all have to be the same queue for getting your video included in others' recommendations.

>>ilikeh+ql
I can just see the outrage now: "YouTube running a pay-to-play scheme for exposure. Anyone can upload their video, but only the rich can get an audience!"

Come to think of it, this is basically the complaint against AdWords and the gradual takeover of the search result page by paid results.