zlacker

Except YouTube isn’t the equivalent of a library in the first place, it’s the equivalent of a slightly seedy corner store. Sure there might be some mildly informative magazines on a shelf next to the Maxims, but that’s not the point and never was.

>>achero+(OP)
My argument is, it's a vastly underpowered system in terms of the filtering options available to users. Those things ought to remain available, but I wish it were easier to tell Youtube my goals for a browsing session and turn off porn mode.

>>throwa+w1
You could easily reword your comment as wishing there were convenience stores without the magazines.

I agree with the other person here. It’s just the context of YouTube. Take HN for example: there’s little to no adult content on this site.

I’m in a similar camp in that I’m frustrated daily that Facebook can’t figure out that I (admittedly a single 30 male) don’t want the lewd content. I say “show less of this” on every lewd post, but it can’t figure it out.

That being said, I think the answer is fostering/finding other communities with different natures rather than changing Facebook or YouTube to be something they aren’t.

>>comfyp+kc
How many content discovery systems can you point to that have the breadth and depth of video content that Youtube does?

I don't think it's too much to just give feedback into the void with the hope that if enough people chime in with the same thoughts, that some day some Google PM might actually do something about it.

That being said, I'm sure its a question of $ budget for ML recommender processing and/or the cost of labeling videos. But the labeling could be done by users.

>>comfyp+kc
Something I discovered accidentally was that searching for maternity bras got rid of most of the lewd content for a few weeks.

>>throwa+w1
YouTube doesn’t want that. Their metrics show that less user control and more “algorithm” results in more users behaving properly: looking at more ads.

>>throwa+w1
>I wish it were easier to tell Youtube my goals for a browsing session and turn off porn mode.

I mean, this is a game of cat and mouse. YT is already very aggressive on sexual content. Content creators just find the next line and push it there.You could require everyone making videos to be wearing suits and people would still find ways to be evocative.

At some point your best move is to self moderate. Ignore those thumbnails or aggressively click "not interested" on any content like that.

>But the labeling could be done by users.

In these times? It'd be a bloodbath of political labels being thrown at various ideaologies. It'd be a wreck.

No, this can't be automated. YT would need to pay staff and set a rubric. But I'm guessing that it's not financially impacting YT as is.

>>johnny+sZ1
I meant labels such as "educational", "funny", "thirst-inducing" or "sexy", as opposed to just thumbs-up / thumbs-down.

>>rngnam+d53
Sure, but it has the same problems. Who makes the labels, and do you trust that consensus? It would simply take seeing some cryptocurrency cult webinar being labeled "educational" or something to that effect before suddenly the labels become as much noise as the "related videos" section (made up over half of your recommendations instead of related videos).

It could also go the other way. Add a "misinformation" label and suddenly everything is misinformation, from Jordan Peterson speeches to live recorded NASA space launches to Spongebob clips.

>>johnny+0O3
I agree it's an imperfect solution, but I do think in very broad strokes it would move the needle in the right direction. Surely a video about engine repair that one only finds when searching the specific make and model would garner fewer 'sexual' votes than a music video or thirst trap.