It has a pretty good recommendation algorithm which guarantees you’ll find more videos similar to the ones you like. Moreover, it features the official channels of various big companies so you can find plenty of legit videos here.įor instance, DailyMotion can be your go-to site if you want to watch videos of popular American sports after the game is broadcast, Hollywood gossip videos from entertainment channels, or upload videos yourself. It has a lenient policy on copyrighted content. However, it will show videos that you’ll never find on other sites like YouTube or Facebook. In what Facebook described as “a major PR win”, the New Zealand prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, used “FB live to update her followers after the announcement”.10 LiveLeak Alternatives: Shocking Video Sites Not For The Faint-Hearted 1 – DailyMotion 2 – MyVidster 3 – Xfinity Video 4 – eBaum’s World 5 – Kaotic 6 – VideosHub 7 – ItemFix 8 – Veoh 9 – DTube 10 – KillSomeTime What is LiveLeak and what led to its rise? Why was LiveLeak shut down? Wrapping upĭailyMotion won’t give you much controversial content. The change was announced in tandem with the Christchurch summit held in Paris, aimed at eliminating terrorist content online. The company admitted it had “minimal restrictions in place to prevent risky actors going to live” and in May 2019 announced a “one strike” policy that blocked accounts with a single terror violation from using Live for 30 days. The Christchurch video now scored 0.96 on the internal graphic violence scale, well above the intervention threshold.Įlsewhere, this set of leaked documents show how keen Facebook was to repair its damaged image. It also included first person shooter video game footage, as examples of content not to block.Īs a result of this and other efforts, the documents show that Facebook believed it had slashed the detection time from five minutes to 12 seconds. “The training dataset includes videos like police/military body cams footage, recreational shooting and simulations,” the internal material says, plus “videos from the military” obtained from by the company’s law enforcement outreach team. A key element was to retrain its company’s AI video detection systems by feeding it a dataset of harmful content, to work out what to highlight and block. It also details how Facebook grappled with the problem, trying to improve its cutting edge technology. The leaked documents, initially published by Gizmodo, underscore the failure, showing that at the time of Christchurch, the social media giant was “only able to detect violations five mins into a broadcast” – and that the attack video only scored 0.11 on an internal graphic violence scale when the threshold for intervention was 0.65. No Facebook user complained for 29 minutes and executives were forced to admit its detection systems were “not perfect”. “Since this event, we’ve faced international media pressure and have seen regulatory and legal risks increase on Facebook increase considerably.”Īt the time Facebook admitted its AI systems had failed to prevent the broadcast, and the video was only removed after the company was alerted by New Zealand police. “It was clear that Live was a vulnerable surface which can be repurposed by bad actors to cause societal harm,” the leaked review stated. 1.5m uploads had to be removed in the 24 hours afterwards. The white supremacist attacker was able to broadcast a 17-minute live stream of the attack on two mosques that was not detected by the company’s systems, allowing it to be swiftly replicated online.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |