On: I was blackmailed – any YouTuber could be next

[ta17711771]

If you can't figure out how to scale proper customer service, there's a simple solution: don't grow too large too fast.

I know, blasphemy to the VC crowd.

[crazygringo → ta17711771]

It's not blasphemy, just elementary economics.

Customer service at scale, for many products, turns the product from profitable into a severe loss. It will go out of business no ifs ands or buts.

YouTube clearly cannot survive if its customer service costs exceed its advertising revenue.

It has absolutely nothing to do with speed of growth, and I don't know why you think it does.

Are you saying free user-generated video hosting sites shouldn't exist period? That YouTube simply shouldn't exist? Because that seems to be what you're saying.

[ta17711771 → crazygringo]

Not necessarily.

Either have proper human or machine evaluation and very fast response to complaints about fuckups, or,

let it be an open platform, and only respond to legal requests to remove things, the way the Internet used to work,

...because they clearly cannot handle the alternative without fucking people over repeatedly.

[chongli → crazygringo]

Customer service at scale, for many products, turns the product from profitable into a severe loss.

If that is the case then Google is helpless to stop these attacks from growing out of control. How long before the long tail of YouTube is clipped off?

[crazygringo → chongli]

Well that's another false extreme.

That's what algorithmic detection (together with user flagging) and removal at scale is for. That prevents them from growing out of control.

The combo of algorithmic detection at scale, combined with small amounts of manual intervention and customer service where most needed, is how YouTube is able to operate.

[chongli → crazygringo]

The combo of algorithmic detection at scale, combined with small amounts of manual intervention and customer service where most needed, is how YouTube is able to operate.

This article is evidence that the process is breaking down. It's an old maxim in computer security that attacks become more sophisticated over time as knowledge of the system grows and spreads among attackers. That is what we are seeing here. YouTube has built a system which is ultimately unsustainable at this scale. Over time these attacks will continue to escalate until only the very large channels (those they have the resources to support in person) and the very small channels (those beneath the notice of attackers) are left.

[crazygringo → chongli]

> This article is evidence that the process is breaking down.

No, the article is a single instance. If it becomes common, YouTube will create systems to prevent this type of attack.

> YouTube has built a system which is ultimately unsustainable at this scale.

There's just no evidence of that -- that's pure conjecture. And given how Google has seemed to manage abuse and spam at a commercially successful level in plenty of other products (not perfect, but maintaining the platform), I would bet on YouTube continuing to succeed here.

[ta17711771 → crazygringo]

I see a dozen of these instances a week.

Consider that you're out of touch.