Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
njsykora
Jan 23, 2012

Robots confuse squirrels.


Shame Boy posted:

yeah i was gonna say there's no way fuckin' pokemon yellow version is at all rare

i have considered multiple times tweeting a photo of my copy at him saying if he wants to play it he can borrow

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

bort
Mar 13, 2003

Amicus briefs from Rick Santorum and the ACLU :confuoot:

kw0134
Apr 19, 2003

ugh, this is ridiculous. does sorting by time stamp constitute a "recommendation" which would strip 230 protection? an algorithm is simply any method of performing a task. a program that sorts alphabetically is implementing an algorithm.

Zamujasa
Oct 27, 2010



Bread Liar

smellmycheese posted:

I did some work at a toy auction house last year and the world of “graded” toys (ie assessed for how good the condition is and then sealed in an airtight box) is loving insane. Star Wars figures going for 5 figures.

it's incredibly frustrating and i say this as someone who actually owns a pcb in a shiny acrylic case. (the previous owner did it, unfortunately.)

the funniest thing is when the very important and all-knowing grading companies grade and slab a fake as if it's real. that's always a good time.

RPATDO_LAMD
Mar 22, 2013

🐘🪠🍆

kw0134 posted:

ugh, this is ridiculous. does sorting by time stamp constitute a "recommendation" which would strip 230 protection? an algorithm is simply any method of performing a task. a program that sorts alphabetically is implementing an algorithm.

there's a difference between an objective measure like that vs one that uses some kind of editorial decision making (even if the editorial decision is actually made by a beep boop computer running some heuristic)

kw0134
Apr 19, 2003

RPATDO_LAMD posted:

there's a difference between an objective measure like that vs one that uses some kind of editorial decision making (even if the editorial decision is actually made by a beep boop computer running some heuristic)
the choice of any sorting is arbitrary, and is not "objective". why not geographical or by age of the user or the declared gender or shoe size?

infernal machines
Oct 11, 2012

And, for an instant, she stared directly into those soft blue eyes and knew, with an instinctive mammalian certainty, that the exceedingly rich were no longer even remotely human
much like any form of categorization is inherently exclusionary

FAUXTON
Jun 2, 2005

spero che tu stia bene

Endless Mike posted:

know what's better than owning a physical collectible of something? owning a link that says you own a physical collectible of something that's not in your possession

https://twitter.com/ethfrenchie/status/1617560774519721984?s=61&t=Pi4uy-wozJGNyg-meqPSQg

expensive art collections held in freeports work like this which is why it's really fuckin funny that NFTs took off like wildfire just as the EU started making noises about cracking down on money laundering via art sales

haveblue
Aug 15, 2005


Toilet Rascal
an algorithm that functions at the explicit request and under the control of the user is permissible, not ones that run automatically without sufficiently specific user input

kw0134
Apr 19, 2003

why? you're basically saying that any user service is not allowed to do anything at all, including putting example videos on its own homepage, without possibly incurring liability for a third party's speech, without the user specifically requesting it. sa's own front page (yes there is a front page) would violate this with its "popular forum threads" section.

Mr. Nice!
Oct 13, 2005

c-spam cannot afford


kw0134 posted:

the choice of any sorting is arbitrary, and is not "objective". why not geographical or by age of the user or the declared gender or shoe size?

youtube's recommended videos is not something that is just merely sorted. the facts of this case, which the court accepts as true at this current procedural posture, is that google via youtube allowed isis to host videos on youtube and actively recommended those videos to people who became radicalized. because youtube deliberately fed the person more extreme content, as it drives the greatest reaction, they are no longer just a service provider hosting videos, but actually culpable for that radicalization. people died due to youtube recommending these videos, and their families have sued.

the district court dismissed the case, but the 9th circuit didn't exactly. there were two different opinions that carried a majority of the judges. one affirmed the dismissal under 9th circuit precedent. the other held that same precedent was invalid and inconsistent with the legislative history and text of section 230.

this isn't google getting sued over a sorting algo. they allowed terrorists to host recruitment videos and solicited people to watch them.

Mr. Nice!
Oct 13, 2005

c-spam cannot afford


kw0134 posted:

why? you're basically saying that any user service is not allowed to do anything at all, including putting example videos on its own homepage, without possibly incurring liability for a third party's speech, without the user specifically requesting it. sa's own front page (yes there is a front page) would violate this with its "popular forum threads" section.

not remotely. that's not what the facts of the case are, and that's the not the point of the case right now. it is entirely about google hosting and recommending terrorist recruiting videos which resulted in people's deaths. a list of highly viewed videos is not the same thing.

infernal machines
Oct 11, 2012

And, for an instant, she stared directly into those soft blue eyes and knew, with an instinctive mammalian certainty, that the exceedingly rich were no longer even remotely human
what if the terrorist's videos are highly viewed?

Improbable Lobster
Jan 6, 2012

What is the Matrix 🌐? We just don't know 😎.


Buglord

smellmycheese posted:

I did some work at a toy auction house last year and the world of “graded” toys (ie assessed for how good the condition is and then sealed in an airtight box) is loving insane. Star Wars figures going for 5 figures.

it is such a huge scam

Shumagorath
Jun 5, 2001

infernal machines posted:

what if the terrorist's videos are highly viewed?
“АВБПМ sucked me off (this planet)????”

infernal machines
Oct 11, 2012

And, for an instant, she stared directly into those soft blue eyes and knew, with an instinctive mammalian certainty, that the exceedingly rich were no longer even remotely human
some soy faced freedom fighter imploring you to like and subscribe

haveblue
Aug 15, 2005


Toilet Rascal
*tiktok voice* death to america. allah is great

kw0134
Apr 19, 2003

Mr. Nice! posted:

not remotely. that's not what the facts of the case are, and that's the not the point of the case right now. it is entirely about google hosting and recommending terrorist recruiting videos which resulted in people's deaths. a list of highly viewed videos is not the same thing.
that's the problem though; section 230 specifically immunizes google for *third party content.* google recommends lots of things, and the recognition is that moderating at scale is, in a word, really loving hard. this leads to this presumably facetious post but actually kind of cuts into the heart surprisingly well:

infernal machines posted:

what if the terrorist's videos are highly viewed?
what if they are, in fact, highly viewed before someone pulled the trigger and yanked it? there's a lot of content that is absolutely harmful but ends up being viewed widely because that's the nature of the internet. facebook live yanked the stream of the gunman running around in a mosque in new zealand, but those clips were probably among the most viewed videos for that day. would you hold facebook liable if the "algorithm" of "here's what's popular!" let a clip slip in?

further, we're making a hash of it because it's terrorism, but there's lots of harmful content out there. would an antivaxx video that encourages people to shoot bleach into your veins to fight the menace of mrna vaccines trigger liability when some idiot does that? how about if someone posts a video on how to do some electrical wiring, and the video was full of terrible, awful advice by every measurable standard of electrical work, resulting in people burning their houses down? the algorithm knows "electrical" and "video" and since you've indicated interest in field stripping wires while live, here's a video by a self-proclaimed electrician who believes ohm's law is simply a lie by the IBEW. like...i'm almost certain more people have died because they've decided that ivermectin is a better cure for covid, which idea they've gotten in part from someone ranting on facebook or in a youtube video. and since you've watched this video of alex jones ranting, here's another one. is that enough to make google liable?

i personally think eugene volokh in this amici got it right, but that's me.

Shumagorath
Jun 5, 2001

haveblue posted:

*tiktok voice* death to america. allah is great
Taliban are already paying for twitter blue; not even a stretch

Weatherman
Jul 30, 2003

WARBLEKLONK

Shumagorath posted:

Taliban are already paying for twitter blue; not even a stretch

no ring either

Pigbuster
Sep 12, 2010

Fun Shoe
When Isis discovers the power of playing Subway Surfers footage next to their recruitment videos we're all doomed

Improbable Lobster
Jan 6, 2012

What is the Matrix 🌐? We just don't know 😎.


Buglord
I feel like "content moderation is hard so bog companies don't have to do it" isn't a good defense

fisting by many
Dec 25, 2009



njsykora posted:

gotta dunk on the guy who's been raging for a full week now about his priceless copy of a game that sold 14 million copies that he paid $3k for because it was in a plastic box

wata games specifically is a whole racket

it is very much like the nft bubble, where worthless trinkets are valuable because a few people bleated loudly enough (and publicized wash trades enough) that they were inflated to high hell, in the hopes that a few suckers are dumb enough to pay the fake price

the key difference is that some people actually wanted to buy retro games at a fair, non-hyper-inflated price

ymgve
Jan 2, 2004


:dukedog:
Offensive Clock

infernal machines posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lbdij5Vi8oY

the trick is to run all the remaining copies through a woodchipper

no, the trick is to be a youtube channel with millions of fans, and then setting up a charity auction (and they only destroyed copies that fans have sent to them over the years, there are still thousands of copies out there in dusty attics)

nukie would never have sold for $80k even if it was the very last VHS existing if it was just some random guy selling it

Improbable Lobster
Jan 6, 2012

What is the Matrix 🌐? We just don't know 😎.


Buglord

ymgve posted:

no, the trick is to be a youtube channel with millions of fans, and then setting up a charity auction (and they only destroyed copies that fans have sent to them over the years, there are still thousands of copies out there in dusty attics)

nukie would never have sold for $80k even if it was the very last VHS existing if it was just some random guy selling it

sure but if you look at some of the example auctions of "sealed" vhses (which as they point out could have been sitting on a pile of magnets or just shrinkwrapped again) it's obviously some kind of scam

ymgve
Jan 2, 2004


:dukedog:
Offensive Clock

Improbable Lobster posted:

sure but if you look at some of the example auctions of "sealed" vhses (which as they point out could have been sitting on a pile of magnets or just shrinkwrapped again) it's obviously some kind of scam

yeah, that is the point of the video. but their own auction wasn't an attempt to profit on that scam, and they didn't destroy the tapes to inflate the value of their own tape.

Deep Dish Fuckfest
Sep 6, 2006

Advanced
Computer Touching


Toilet Rascal

Improbable Lobster posted:

sure but if you look at some of the example auctions of "sealed" vhses (which as they point out could have been sitting on a pile of magnets or just shrinkwrapped again) it's obviously some kind of scam

what? you can't just shrinkwrap something! that's not how it works! it'd be like funging a nft or being identified as one of the parties in a bitcoin transaction. pure madness

infernal machines
Oct 11, 2012

And, for an instant, she stared directly into those soft blue eyes and knew, with an instinctive mammalian certainty, that the exceedingly rich were no longer even remotely human

ymgve posted:

yeah, that is the point of the video. but their own auction wasn't an attempt to profit on that scam, and they didn't destroy the tapes to inflate the value of their own tape.

i realize it's impossible to read sarcasm or irony over the internet, but from context* i assumed it would have been clear that i was not suggesting that they actually inflated the value of the tape for auction, it was a joke they made in the video

also a great excuse to run a few dozen copies of nukie through a woodchipper

*the context being the video i posted where that exact joke is made

infernal machines fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Jan 25, 2023

ymgve
Jan 2, 2004


:dukedog:
Offensive Clock
maybe I was overreacting a bit but I've seen people claim they destroyed all other copies and yelling at them because of media preservation

infernal machines
Oct 11, 2012

And, for an instant, she stared directly into those soft blue eyes and knew, with an instinctive mammalian certainty, that the exceedingly rich were no longer even remotely human
lmao. media preservation of nukie.

hopefully the library of congress won that auction

Boxturret
Oct 3, 2013

Don't ask me about Sonic the Hedgehog diaper fetish
imagine a world where there were only 24 remaining copies of nukie

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Boxturret posted:

imagine a world where there were only 24 remaining copies of nukie

Wild EEPROM
Jul 29, 2011


oh, my, god. Becky, look at her bitrate.
doesn’t ebay now have a thing where you can mail them your collectables and they will store it in their vault and it can be sold and resold without leaving their vault

Midjack
Dec 24, 2007



Wild EEPROM posted:

doesn’t ebay now have a thing where you can mail them your collectables and they will store it in their vault and it can be sold and resold without leaving their vault

yes

blugu64
Jul 17, 2006

Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face?
brb buying some frozen steaks on ebay to store in the vault

Lead out in cuffs
Sep 18, 2012

"That's right. We've evolved."

"I can see that. Cool mutations."




kw0134 posted:

that's the problem though; section 230 specifically immunizes google for *third party content.* google recommends lots of things, and the recognition is that moderating at scale is, in a word, really loving hard. this leads to this presumably facetious post but actually kind of cuts into the heart surprisingly well:

what if they are, in fact, highly viewed before someone pulled the trigger and yanked it? there's a lot of content that is absolutely harmful but ends up being viewed widely because that's the nature of the internet. facebook live yanked the stream of the gunman running around in a mosque in new zealand, but those clips were probably among the most viewed videos for that day. would you hold facebook liable if the "algorithm" of "here's what's popular!" let a clip slip in?

further, we're making a hash of it because it's terrorism, but there's lots of harmful content out there. would an antivaxx video that encourages people to shoot bleach into your veins to fight the menace of mrna vaccines trigger liability when some idiot does that? how about if someone posts a video on how to do some electrical wiring, and the video was full of terrible, awful advice by every measurable standard of electrical work, resulting in people burning their houses down? the algorithm knows "electrical" and "video" and since you've indicated interest in field stripping wires while live, here's a video by a self-proclaimed electrician who believes ohm's law is simply a lie by the IBEW. like...i'm almost certain more people have died because they've decided that ivermectin is a better cure for covid, which idea they've gotten in part from someone ranting on facebook or in a youtube video. and since you've watched this video of alex jones ranting, here's another one. is that enough to make google liable?

i personally think eugene volokh in this amici got it right, but that's me.

Did the president of the United States face consequences when he told people to drink bleach to stop COVID and people did it?

RPATDO_LAMD
Mar 22, 2013

🐘🪠🍆
please dont spread misinformation
the president of the united states told people to inject bleach

go play outside Skyler
Nov 7, 2005


saying content moderation at that scale is hard is admitting that google, facebook et al don't want to invest the money to fix the problem.

yes, you can do content moderation, but you need humans regularly going through the content and applying rules and banning people. you also need these people to care about the community and not necessarily do it for 2$ an hour getting ptsd looking at videos of people dying (or worse)

what most people don't understand is that these platforms are like old school bbs'es. and guess what bbs'es do? they have moderators and admins that very publicly do their jobs and hand out punishments to those not respecting the rules.

what's the mod to user ratio for sa? i bet you it's 10x higher than however many humans facebook is ""paying"" to go through the murder videos

RPATDO_LAMD
Mar 22, 2013

🐘🪠🍆
10 sounds like an extreme underestimate

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SolTerrasa
Sep 2, 2011

go play outside Skyler posted:

saying content moderation at that scale is hard is admitting that google, facebook et al don't want to invest the money to fix the problem.

yes, you can do content moderation, but you need humans regularly going through the content and applying rules and banning people. you also need these people to care about the community and not necessarily do it for 2$ an hour getting ptsd looking at videos of people dying (or worse)

what most people don't understand is that these platforms are like old school bbs'es. and guess what bbs'es do? they have moderators and admins that very publicly do their jobs and hand out punishments to those not respecting the rules.

what's the mod to user ratio for sa? i bet you it's 10x higher than however many humans facebook is ""paying"" to go through the murder videos

approximately 1:3,000 plus or minus depending on who you count as active. as low as 1:250 if you’re real aggressively dismissive with who counts as a user. 1:250 is also about right for well moderated large discord servers.

facebook’s would be … 1 : 2,000,000

e: twitter, 1 : 500,000
tiktok: 1:100,000

SolTerrasa fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Jan 25, 2023

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply