zlacker

>>furcyd+(OP)
"If YouTube won’t remove the algorithm, it must, at the very least, make significant changes, and have greater human involvement in the recommendation process.", man does this person know how many videos and how many users YouTube has? They cannot use anything except an algorithm to recommend videos. They cannot use anything except an algorithm to detect videos inappropriate for children. It seems YouTube is working on this, and this opinion seems like a ill thought out fluff piece to enrage readers and sell this persons book.

>>strike+jh
Just to add on, a Youtube executive was recently on a podcast and she said there are 500 videos uploaded per second.

>>scarfa+Xk
thats.... actually shockingly few

>>Rugnir+1q
The stat I heard while at Google (~5 years ago) was that 8 hours of video is uploaded every second. Cross-checking that against the 500 videos/sec figure, it implies that the average video is about 1 minute. I suspect the 8 hours figure is pretty out-of-date now, and it's more like 20 hours/sec.

BTW, you could do some simple math to figure out how many employees it'd take to have a human watch every video that comes in. 3600 secs/hour * 20 hours of video/sec = 72000 secs/video/sec, * 3 to assume 8 hour shifts = 216,000 employees, * $30K/year = $6.4B/year. It's theoretically doable, but you wouldn't get the product for free anymore.

>>nostra+rr
$30k/year seems high. This is the sort of work that would be likely outsourced, perhaps to the Philippines for less than $10k/year per person.

$2B is still nothing to sneeze at, but it's less than Microsoft paid for Minecraft.

>>sereto+wt
Considering that rumors are that YouTube is still barely above break even, that is a lot.