Youtube Restricted Mode Comments

[EEVblog]

and

[HAL-42b]

Content creators must not allow YouTube and Google be the monopoly outlet for their creations. You must publish to alternate sites so not all your eggs are in Google's basket.

There is another solution - GNU Mediagoblin

http://mediagoblin.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaGoblin

It is a federated media sharing platform. You install it on your own server. I think federated means that it is possible to share server resources with other creators thus cutting bandwidth costs.

I suppose monetization could be direct or trough advertisement.

[EEVblog]

There might be a delay in processing new videos to determine whether they should be restricted or not.

Possible I guess.

[Domagoj T]

The disabling of comment section seems to be automatic for all channels (even BBC and Fox News you mention) when restricted mode is turned on. Both my channels have disabled comments and they are even less offensive to special snowflakes than your channel (one is for the model railroad layout I work on/for and the other is just some random test thing with three videos and 1700 views total).
So, it's a blanket restriction on commenting, nothing personal.

[Vgkid]

I didn't notice any missing from AvE, but all of the Forgotten Weapons videos are missing.

[wikktor]

There are more videos restricted on your channel
For example eevBLAB #30 - Popular Science FAIL! (WaterSeer Debunk):

It is funny, because  restricted mode is seen as old media fighting new media, and in this video you pointed out Fail in old media magazine.

Edit:
found more - LIVE Show Giveaway

[langwadt]

I didn't notice any missing from AvE, but all of the Forgotten Weapons videos are missing.

not surprising, they had to blur the nazi  flag that was on the thumbnail for videos on WWII german guns

It may sound conspiratorial but it does seem like old media is running a campaign to get their advertisers back from new media,
Running hit pieces shaming companies by suggesting  that by advertising on YouTube they are somehow endorsing 
the content in every video.  They have managed to get some big players to drop YouTube 

[FrankBuss]

That's strange, I think this one was blocked an hour before, too, but now it works in restricted mode:



BTW: tested it in a browser without AdBlocker and it shows a Rohde and Schwartz ad for a portable scope at the beginning

But the blocking algorithm is very unpredictable. This game play video I made is blocked:



But this game play video from me is not blocked:



Granted, World of Goo might be more educational and less offensive than Vainglory

[wikktor]

I think they should add additional "rogue mode" which would show only restricted content .
Would be easier to find what is restricted.

[Barny]

The funny thing is, that the "EEVblog #983 - A Shocking Oscilloscope Problem ! aka Whack Triggering" video didn't show up for me yesterday.
I had to watch it embedded in the forum.

The funny thing is, that the whole world is gone nuts at the moment.
Put aside the politic & religious wackos, the german media control finally discovered the internet and demand content creators to buy TV broad cast licences.
 
This kills every content creator which isn't backed from "old media" because even without the licence costs, the bureaucracy and its costs is insane.
 

[Fungus]

Maybe the people who automatically downvote all your videos put in "complaints" as well.

[vokars]

Now censorship happens only in the special restricted mode. Without protest restricted mode will be the default option. And if there is no protest then the final step will be that there is no option anymore.

Yes this is a censorship attack. And it is well organized and not limited to Google. It proceeds step by step and tests in every step if the user is ready to accept it. It has to look "normal" and that it would be honest ("help and protect children").

Began after the lost election in the US when the old media realized that they lost against the new media. When Obama met with Merkel during his last days, Merkel claimed "Leitplanken" (guard railings) for the internet. And a few days later the Facebook "fake news" campaign was pushed in the old media. Of course the old media are not restricted. Companies like Google or Facebook now try to explain us who is trustworthy and who is not after their old instruments of power doesn't work anymore.

Who sleeps now will wake up in a different world soon ...

[langwadt]

Now censorship happens only in the special restricted mode. Without protest restricted mode will be the default option. And if there is no protest then the final step will be that there is no option anymore.

Yes this is a censorship attack. And it is well organized and not limited to Google. It proceeds step by step and tests in every step if the user is ready to accept it. It has to look "normal" and that it would be honest ("help and protect children").

Began after the lost election in the US when the old media realized that they lost against the new media. When Obama met with Merkel during his last days, Merkel claimed "Leitplanken" (guard railings) for the internet. And a few days later the Facebook "fake news" campaign was pushed in the old media. Of course the old media are not restricted. Companies like Google or Facebook now try to explain us who is trustworthy and who is not after their old instruments of power doesn't work anymore.

Who sleeps now will wake up in a different world soon ...

it is possible that google is just trying to stop the advertisers leaving   

[vokars]

Now censorship happens only in the special restricted mode. Without protest restricted mode will be the default option. And if there is no protest then the final step will be that there is no option anymore.

Yes this is a censorship attack. And it is well organized and not limited to Google. It proceeds step by step and tests in every step if the user is ready to accept it. It has to look "normal" and that it would be honest ("help and protect children").

Began after the lost election in the US when the old media realized that they lost against the new media. When Obama met with Merkel during his last days, Merkel claimed "Leitplanken" (guard railings) for the internet. And a few days later the Facebook "fake news" campaign was pushed in the old media. Of course the old media are not restricted. Companies like Google or Facebook now try to explain us who is trustworthy and who is not after their old instruments of power doesn't work anymore.

Who sleeps now will wake up in a different world soon ...

it is possible that google is just trying to stop the advertisers leaving   

Of course it could be another reason. On the other side the intention to censor the internet was actually announced by Merkel and Obama. And Facebook already made censorship deals with the government in Germany. The facebook fake news campaign was obviously orchestrated by the old media and that shows the level of organization behind that. The step by step acceptance testing of people is also a well known experience of politician approach.

If we assume the possible or even obvious could not be possible then it actually could become reality.

[Brumby]

it is possible that google is just trying to stop the advertisers leaving   

That's a possibility I would put high up on the list.

Like a great many things, the mighty dollar (or whatever the denomination is in your particular corner of the word) rules.

[langwadt]

it is possible that google is just trying to stop the advertisers leaving   

That's a possibility I would put high up on the list.

Like a great many things, the mighty dollar (or whatever the denomination is in your particular corner of the word) rules.

yeh, googles customers are the advertisers if they are leaving google has to try something to stop that

lookup #ThankYouCoke

[mikeselectricstuff]

As they can't control what comments are left at any time, I'm not sure they really have any choice but to disable comments if they want to provide a "safe" mode.

[T3sl4co1l]

As they can't control what comments are left at any time, I'm not sure they really have any choice but to disable comments if they want to provide a "safe" mode.

^

This whole thing seems to misunderstand the purpose of the mode...

Tim

[Domagoj T]

I think they should add additional "rogue mode" which would show only restricted content .
Would be easier to find what is restricted.

That sounds like an awesome addon for browsers. Granted I'm no addon programmer, but I don't see a reason it couldn't be done. Just request the video list twice (once not restricted and once restricted and play find the difference). Pages would probably load noticeably slower, but at least you know it's for the good cause.

[Sigmoid]

Fuck, Dave, really, please, don't go down this lane.

"Old media silencing youtubers?" "Special snowflakes?" This is one fucking step away from reblogging climate change denials from Breitbart News, setting Pepe the Frog as your avatar, and referring to annoying people as "beta cucks". (You have created a reputation of yourself as a skeptic, rational atheist and political centrist... If instead you do happen to be a conspiracy theorist trumpian who thinks the 'liberal elites' are trying to take away 'freedom of speech' from the web, then please keep it under the lid.)

I've been a viewer since 2013, and think you have one of the best tech channels on Youtube. Please try not to go full paranoid schitz over some bloody child safety lock on youtube. I mean sure, Google search also has a child safe setting, and that also "censors" a shitload of hits.

This whole thing is a storm in a teaspoon. It's an opt-in child safety feature. It's not how youtube shows by default, nor is it intended to be. Has nothing to do with advertisers, Merkel or fucking Obama (he's no longer the president if someone may have failed to notice).

[max_torque]

Whilst we all like to indulge in a nice juicy conspiracy theory now and then, i suspect your 'Restricted mode' rant vid got restricted due to you saying "b*llsh*t" and "Bl**dy"  and i bet it scans the sound track for swearing!

[AF6LJ]

A prediction was made last week.
This Restricted mode on YouTube is the beginning of a series of moves to move YouTube away from small content creators, and toward the dying mainstream media, who sees YouTube as their savior....
Many people may already know that a number of channels have been demonitized for their "offensive content".

My self and others are waiting for the anti trust action to begin against Alphabet (Google's parent company).

[metrologist]

I think the mode is a great idea. Sorry, Dave, but I agree with Google on this one. And for the purpose, I think it better for them to err on the safe side. And no algorithm is going to be perfect. Thank you for the video because I was not aware of this new mode.

BTW, I see the distress in you. Is it starting to consume? I would hate the pressure of running a living this way and I can totally understand why these things can get to you. It's close to home, it is home that this hits.

[Kilrah]

Since comments are where you see the most idiocy and other bullshit it's kinda obvious the first thing a restricted mode would do is hide all of that.

[thm_w]

Now censorship happens only in the special restricted mode. Without protest restricted mode will be the default option. And if there is no protest then the final step will be that there is no option anymore.

SafeSearch has been an option for years, and has never been removed.
I fail to see any problem here.

We use many signals—such as video title, description, metadata, Community Guidelines reviews, and age-restrictions—to identify and filter out potentially mature content. Restricted Mode is available in all languages, but due to differences in cultural norms and sensitivities, the quality may vary.

As someone pointed out in the comments, a new video would likely need to be reviewed as safe before it will show up in restricted mode. Although in this case the keyword for "restricted" likely filtered it, as dave mentioned.

[hendorog]

Problem with restricted mode on youtube is that it blocks too much - which makes it useless. My son liked watching youtube and so I turned on restricted mode on our PC's.

It blocks so much that I had to turn it off again. It needs some levels of restriction, or it should have the option to remove the specific content or comment that trips the detector - without removing the entire video.

[langwadt]

Now censorship happens only in the special restricted mode. Without protest restricted mode will be the default option. And if there is no protest then the final step will be that there is no option anymore.

SafeSearch has been an option for years, and has never been removed.
I fail to see any problem here.

We use many signals—such as video title, description, metadata, Community Guidelines reviews, and age-restrictions—to identify and filter out potentially mature content. Restricted Mode is available in all languages, but due to differences in cultural norms and sensitivities, the quality may vary.

As someone pointed out in the comments, a new video would likely need to be reviewed as safe before it will show up in restricted mode. Although in this case the keyword for "restricted" likely filtered it, as dave mentioned.

with 300 hours of video is uploaded every minute 24/7 I don't see how any kind of sensible review is possible

[FrankT]

This whole thing is a storm in a teaspoon. It's an opt-in child safety feature. It's not how youtube shows by default, nor is it intended to be. Has nothing to do with advertisers, Merkel or fucking Obama (he's no longer the president if someone may have failed to notice).

Agreed.  The fact that there is a big message saying "Restricted Mode has hidden comments for this video." makes it pretty obvious how to opt out.  I doubt youtube.com will go through every comment and rate them safe/unsafe.

However, there doesn't seem to be anything showing videos are blocked because of restricted mode.  That's an issue.

[vokars]

SafeSearch has been an option for years, and has never been removed.
I fail to see any problem here.

[..]

As someone pointed out in the comments, a new video would likely need to be reviewed as safe before it will show up in restricted mode. Although in this case the keyword for "restricted" likely filtered it, as dave mentioned.

The fact that TVs already exist for years doesn't mean that the TV-program cannot change. As well as with filtering: The restricted mode feature may exist for a long time but as you explain by yourself is nothing without a filter semantic (programmed rules, manual, ...). And this semantic is basically intransparent. Are you shure that the filter rules are the same also for years? At least difficult to verify from outside and can be changed every time. Finally we have to trust Google. And that is the issue what it's all about: Using the remaining trustworthyness to explain us, who is trustworthy ("serious"). That is exactly what Google is doing with the restricted mode. Or what Facebook tries to do with their fake news campaign. Or the old media with competing new media. The spectum we can observe today is really broad from helping, saving, protecting (as in youtube restricted mode) to throwing with mud ("conspiracy theory") and demonization ("Putin") as well known from some old media.

[vokars]

Fuck, Dave, really, please, don't go down this lane.

"Old media silencing youtubers?" "Special snowflakes?" This is one fucking step away from reblogging climate change denials from Breitbart News, setting Pepe the Frog as your avatar, and referring to annoying people as "beta cucks". (You have created a reputation of yourself as a skeptic, rational atheist and political centrist... If instead you do happen to be a conspiracy theorist trumpian who thinks the 'liberal elites' are trying to take away 'freedom of speech' from the web, then please keep it under the lid.)

I've been a viewer since 2013, and think you have one of the best tech channels on Youtube. Please try not to go full paranoid schitz over some bloody child safety lock on youtube. I mean sure, Google search also has a child safe setting, and that also "censors" a shitload of hits.

This whole thing is a storm in a teaspoon. It's an opt-in child safety feature. It's not how youtube shows by default, nor is it intended to be. Has nothing to do with advertisers, Merkel or fucking Obama (he's no longer the president if someone may have failed to notice).

Hm ... "climate change denials", "paranoid", "conspiracy theorist", ...

Tiny little bit intolerant isn't it? I am afraid that Google will hire you for doing their filtering job. Because then we are zero steps away  from the censorship that threatens us.

[Muxr]

Someone might use Youtube in a professional settings where they don't want comments for instance. Say you're doing a business presentation, and you want to play a Youtube video. I can see having a restricted mode with comments disabled.. especially because sometimes comments on youtube videos can be vile.

As far as restricting videos goes.. they probably use machine learning for that.. like speech recognition and image recognition. And those are prone to being erroneously flagged. It's all a bit annoying and I can see it being scary especially if it's a platform you generate your livelihood on.

Lucky restricted mode is optional and not on by default. So I wouldn't worry too much about it. Doubt any of your target audience will use it.

[EEVblog]

However, there doesn't seem to be anything showing videos are blocked because of restricted mode.  That's an issue.

Just at the individual video level. But yes, videos just "disappear" from your channel. Entire channels and their videos are invisible in Restricted mode.
Why can't they put at least a ghost thumbnail and the title with a big X through it or something.
But I guess just the title or a thumbnail is enough to trigger people.

[EEVblog]

As someone pointed out in the comments, a new video would likely need to be reviewed as safe before it will show up in restricted mode. Although in this case the keyword for "restricted" likely filtered it, as dave mentioned.

Why can't the videos be simply blocked for playback in Restricted mode, but still retain their existing search ranking and visibility?
When you have an entire channel like Phil Defranco just vanish from all search results and even their own channel page, that's unacceptable.

[metrologist]

why is it unacceptable? I searched defranco and found a video about the lawsuit, and there was one other on his video list.

[W2NAP]

Now censorship happens only in the special restricted mode. Without protest restricted mode will be the default option. And if there is no protest then the final step will be that there is no option anymore.

Yes this is a censorship attack. And it is well organized and not limited to Google. It proceeds step by step and tests in every step if the user is ready to accept it. It has to look "normal" and that it would be honest ("help and protect children").

Began after the lost election in the US when the old media realized that they lost against the new media. When Obama met with Merkel during his last days, Merkel claimed "Leitplanken" (guard railings) for the internet. And a few days later the Facebook "fake news" campaign was pushed in the old media. Of course the old media are not restricted. Companies like Google or Facebook now try to explain us who is trustworthy and who is not after their old instruments of power doesn't work anymore.

Who sleeps now will wake up in a different world soon ...

it is possible that google is just trying to stop the advertisers leaving   

google/youtube advertiser leaving thing is a whole cop out. those same companies that left still have no problem slapping ads on tv/network news shows that show graphic content from war zones, crimes, ect. they also have no problems slapping ads on tv/network shows that is pretty much slut tv.

the whole thing is an attack on the new media. the networks can't stop it so now they get the advertisers involved to start pulling ads from the new media to take the money away from the new media in hopes it withers and dies

[Stephan_T]

[...], i suspect your 'Restricted mode' rant vid got restricted due to you saying "b*llsh*t" and "Bl**dy"  and i bet it scans the sound track for swearing!

Google scans the sound track for everything.

"I don't watch bloody youtube" ...
That should be enough to get restricted.

BTW. "Comments • 612", who has the time to read all these comments? If the restricted mode would just block all comments and nothing else, I would probably use it myself. I generally do not even look at youtube comments. The really interesting discussions about EEVBLOG videos are found here in the forum. And also for other EE related videos, I would prefer to discuss them here.

[thm_w]

Why can't the videos be simply blocked for playback in Restricted mode, but still retain their existing search ranking and visibility?
When you have an entire channel like Phil Defranco just vanish from all search results and even their own channel page, that's unacceptable.

Sure, but then they have to blank out the thumbnail (it might be offensive), and also hide any keywords in the title that are not "safe".
I wouldn't want to see a ton of greyed out/x'ed out porn results if I use safesearch, even if the explicit bits are hidden.

That is a valid point about Defranco, the algorithm or community reviews are lacking.

[bitwelder]

What about this:


Are you OK to expose kids to nerd nudity?