YouTube caught making AI-edits to videos and adding misleading AI summaries

https://www.ynetnews.com/tech-and-digital/article/bj1qbwcklg

by mystraline • 8 months ago

417 201 8 months ago

A makeup influencer I follow noticed youtube and instagram are automatically adding filters to his face without permission to his videos. If his content was about lip makeup they make his lips enormous and if it was about eye makeup the filters make his eyes gigantic. They're having AI detecting the type of content and automatically applying filters.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DO9MwTHCoR_/?igsh=MTZybml2NDB...

The screenshots/videos of them doing it are pretty wild, and insane they are editing creators' uploads without consent!

adzm• 8 months ago

This is ridiculous

reactordev• 8 months ago

I can hear the ballpoint pens now…

This is going to be a huge legal fight as the terms of service you agree to on their platform is “they get to do whatever they want” (IANAL). Watch them try to spin this as “user preference” that just opted everyone into.

api6• 8 months ago

That’s the rude awakening creators get on these platforms. If you’re a writer or an artist or a musician, you own your work by default. But if you upload it to these platforms, they own it more or less. It’s there in the terms of service.

Aurornis7• 8 months ago

The video shown as evidence is full of compression artifacts. The influencer is non-technical and assumes it's an AI filter, but the output is obviously not good quality anywhere.

To me, this clearly looks like a case of a very high compression ratio with the motion blocks swimming around on screen. They might have some detail enhancement in the loop to try to overcome the blockiness which, in this case, results in the swimming effect.

It's strange to see these claims being taken at face value on a technical forum. It should be a dead giveaway that this is a compression issue because the entire video is obviously highly compressed and lacking detail.

maxbond7• 8 months ago

This is an unfair analysis. They discuss compression artifacts. They highlight things like their eyes getting bigger which are not what you usually expect from a compression artifact.

If your compression pipeline gives people anime eyes because it's doing "detail enhancement", your compression pipeline is also a filter. If you apply some transformation to a creator's content, and then their viewers perceive that as them disingenuously using a filter, and your response to their complaints is to "well actually" them about whether it is a filter or a compression artifact, you've lost the plot.

To be honest, calling someone "non-technical" and then "well actually"ing them about hair splitting details when the outcome is the same is patronizing, and I really wish we wouldn't treat "normies" that way. Regardless of whether they are technical, they are living in a world increasingly intermediated by technology, and we should be listening to their feedback on it. They have to live with the consequences of our design decisions. If we believe them to be non-technical, we should extend a lot of generosity to them in their use of terminology, and address what they mean instead of nitpicking.

popalchemist• 8 months ago

You obviously didn't watch the video, the claims are beyond the scope of compression and include things like eye and mouth enlargement, and you can clearly see the filter glitching off on some frames.

xboxnolifes• 8 months ago

There are some very clear examples elsewhere. It looks as if youtube applied AI filters to make compression better by removing artifacts and smoothing colors.

cromka• 8 months ago

Someone in the comments explained that this effect was in auto translated videos. Meta and YT apparently use AI to modify the videos to have people match the language when speaking. Which is a nightmare on its own, but not exactly the same.

methuselah_in• 8 months ago

There is no option to turn that off? Or they even don't publish those things anywhere??

weird-eye-issue• 8 months ago

One of the comments on IG explains this perfectly:

"Meta has been doing this; when they auto-translate the audio of a video they are also adding an Al filter to make the mouth of who is speaking match the audio more closely. But doing this can also add a weird filter over all the face."

I don't know why you have to get into conspiracy theories about them applying different filters based on the video content, that would be such a weird micro optimization why would they bother with that

eloisius• 8 months ago

I doubt that’s what’s happening too but it’s not beyond the pale. They could be feeding both the input video and audio/transcript into their transformer and it has learned “when the audio is talking about lips the person is usually puckering their lips for the camera” so it regurgitates that.

Irishsteve• 8 months ago

Some random team or engineer does it to get a promo.

machomaster3• 8 months ago

Google has done so many incredibly stupid things, like autotranslating titles/information/audio from a language I already know into English, with no way to turn this off.

Assuming that they did something technically impressive, but stupid again is not a conspiracy, but a reasonable assumption based on previous behavior.

Bombthecat2• 8 months ago

That's actually hilarious

ThePowerOfFuet• 8 months ago

Here's that link without the tracking linking you to everyone who clicks on it:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DO9MwTHCoR_

data-ottawa2• 8 months ago

Are these AI filters, or just applying high compression/recompressing with new algorithms (which look like smoothing out details)?

edit: here's the effect I'm talking about with lossy compression and adaptive quantization: https://cloudinary.com/blog/what_to_focus_on_in_image_compre...

The result is smoothing of skin, and applied heavily on video (as Youtube does, just look for any old video that was HD years ago) would look this way

randycupertino7• 8 months ago

It's filters, I posted an example of it below. Here is a link: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DO9MwTHCoR_/?igsh=MTZybml2NDB...

ares6232• 8 months ago

The time of giving these corps the benefit of the doubt is over.

echelon2• 8 months ago

The examples shown in the links are not filters for aesthetics. These are clearly experiments in data compression

These people are having a moral crusade against an unannounced Google data compression test thinking Google is using AI to "enhance their videos". (Did they ever stop to ask themselves why or to what end?)

This level of AI paranoia is getting annoying. This is clearly just Google trying to save money. Not undermine reality or whatever vague Orwellian thing they're being accused of.

data-ottawa2• 8 months ago

It's very hard to tell in that instagram video, it would be a lot clearer if someone overlaid the original unaltered video and the one viewers on YouTube are seeing.

That would presumably be an easy smoking gun for some content creator to produce.

There are heavy alterations in that link, but having not seen the original, and in this format it's not clear to me how they compare.

Aurornis7• 8 months ago

It's compression artifacts. They might be heavily compressing video and trying to recover detail on the client side.

chao-• 8 months ago

I learned to ignore the AI summaries after the first time I saw one that described the exact OPPOSITE conclusion/stance of the video it purported to summarize.

Trasmatta• 8 months ago

Also I just absolutely hate the tone of them. So obviously AI, and they all have the same structure, ending in "Prepare for a journey through blah blah blah".

leobg• 8 months ago

It would be nice of them to diffuse the clickbait.

As it is, when a video has a catchy clickbait title, I screenshot the thumbnail and have ChatGPT give me the solution. Or I’ll copy the URL into a transcript fetcher and feed that into Gemini so I can ask specific questions.

He who clickbaits is demoted to the role of “Suggest a topic for me to ask ChatGPT about”.

matejdro• 8 months ago

You can get rid of the clickbait using DeArrow extension: https://dearrow.ajay.app/

ssl-32• 8 months ago

You know... When I see something that crosses my threshold of clickbait on my YouTube feed, I just select "Not interested" or "Don't recommend channel".

Given the contrast between my usual logged-in Youtube feed, and the rampant sea of unfettered clickbait I see when I've been logged out on any particular device.

He who clickbaits is therefore demoted to the role of seldom or never being seen [by me] at all.

This makes sense: If the algorithm exists to increase viewership and engagement, then the algorithm therefore serves to show me stuff that I'll watch. It does not serve to present to me things that I will not watch.

And it works. I can't even find any clickbaity material right now to reference.

It's pretty great.

superkuh2• 8 months ago

The citation chain for these mastodon reposts resolves to the Gamers Nexus piece on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrwJgDHJJoE

TheTaytay• 8 months ago

Yes! Thank you! He is talking about AI generated summaries being inaccurate, which is plenty to get up in arms about.

A lot of folks here hate AI and YouTube and Google and stuff, but it would be more productive to hate them for what they are actually doing.

But most people here are just taking this headline at face value and getting pitchforks out. If you try to watch the makeup guy’s proof, it’s talking about Instagram (not YouTube), doesn’t have clean comparisons, is showing a video someone sent back to him, which probably means it’s a compression artifact, not a face filter that the corporate overlords are hiding from the creator. It is not exactly a smoking gun, especially for a technical crowd.

jeffbee2• 8 months ago

I, for one, find it extremely odd that any of these video posters believe they get to control whether or not I use, directly or indirectly, an AI to summarize the video for me.

cyost• 8 months ago

It also goes here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86nhP8tvbLY

MaxL933• 8 months ago

"Making AI edits to videos" strikes me as as bit of an exaggeration; it might lead you to think they're actually editing videos rather than simply... post-processing them[1].

That being said, I don't believe they should be doing anything like this without the creator's explicit consent. I do personally think there's probably a good use case for machine learning / neural network tech applied to the clean up of low-quality sources (for better transcoding that doesn't accumulate errors & therefore wastes bitrate), in the same way that RTX Video Super Resolution can do some impressive deblocking & upscaling magic[2] on Windows. But clearly they are completely missing the mark with whatever experiment they were running there.

[1] https://www.ynetnews.com/tech-and-digital/article/bj1qbwcklg

[2] compare https://i.imgur.com/U6vzssS.png & https://i.imgur.com/x63o8WQ.jpeg (upscaled 360p)

ssl-32• 8 months ago

Please allow me "post-process" your comment a bit. Let me know if I'm doing this right.

"Making AI edits to videos" strikes me as something particularly egregious; it leads a viewer to see a reality that never existed, and that the creator never intended.

randycupertino7• 8 months ago

It's not post-processing, they are applying actual filters, here is an example they make his eyes and lips bigger: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DO9MwTHCoR_/?igsh=MTZybml2NDB...

MaxL933• 8 months ago

Sure, but that's not YouTube. That's Instagram. He says so at 1:30.

YouTube is not applying any "face filters" or anything of the sort. They did however experiment with AI upscaling the entire image which is giving the classic "bad upscale" smeary look.

Like I said, I think that's still bad and they should have never done it without the clear explicit consent of the creator. But that is, IMO, very different and considerably less bad than changing someone's face specifically.

stevenalowe• 8 months ago

Every YT short looks AI-ified and creepy now

TazeTSchnitzel2• 8 months ago

The AI filter applied server-side to YouTube Shorts (and only shorts, not regular videos) is horrible, and it feels like it must be a case of deliberate boiling the frog. If everyone gets used to overly smooth skin, weirdly pronounced wrinkles, waxy hair, and strange ringing around moving objects, then AI-generated content will stand out less when they start injecting it into the feed. At first I thought this must be some client-side upscaling filter, but tragically it is not. There's no data savings at all, and there's no way for uploaders or viewers to turn it off. I guess I wasn't cynical enough.

api6• 8 months ago

I’ve been saying for a while that the end game for addictive short form chum feeds like TikTok and YouTube Shorts is to drop human creators entirely. They’ll be AI generated slop feeds that people will scroll, and scroll, and scroll. Basically just a never ending feed of brain rot and ads.

bitwize• 8 months ago

Yes, but what happens when the AIs themselves begin to brainrot (as happens when they are not fed their usual sustenance of information from humans and the real world)?

eagleinparadise• 8 months ago

I buy into this conspiracy theory, it's genius. It's literally a boiling the frog kind of strategy against users. Eventually, everyone will get too lazy to go through the mental reasoning of judging every increasingly piece of content as "is this AI" as you mentally spend energy trying to find clues.

And over time the AI content will improve enough where it becomes impossible and then the Great AI Swappening will occur.

coliveira2• 8 months ago

There's already a huge number of AI generated channels in youtube. The only difference is that they're uploaded by channel owners. What's is gonna happen very quickly (if not already) is that Youtube itself will start "testing" AI content that it creates on what will look like new channels. In a matter of a few years they'll promote this "content" to occupy most of the time and views in the platform.

add-sub-mul-div• 8 months ago

Perhaps the shorter/dumber the medium and format, the less discerning an audience it attracts. We're seeing a split between people who reject the idea of content without the subtext of the human creation behind it, and people who just take content for what it is on the surface without knowing why it should matter how it was created.

mapmeld• 8 months ago

Meta already teased making this ("Vibes") in September. Also OpenAI's homepage for their Sora tool is a bunch of AI video shorts.

AstroBen• 8 months ago

I think this will backfire and kill any service that mass implements it. The human to human nature of video is important to the engagement. Even if it becomes such that you can't tell on individual videos, eventually they'll become known for just being AI slop farms as a whole (something that I'm seeing have a lot of backlash)

And what for? Tiktok creators already generate content for them

port11• 8 months ago

Whenever we open YouTube to play a song for our toddler, we see at least 90% slop Shorts. It's disgusting.

account422• 8 months ago

On the one hand it's going to be a horrible dystopia. One the other hand, I am not sad to see "Influencer" cease to be a viable job.

absoluteunit13• 8 months ago

Wow - I had not considered this as the intention.

UltraSane• 8 months ago

I think they are doing it so they can mask the extreme compression they are doing to YouTube shorts.

dotancohen• 8 months ago

Have you tried viewing the short in the normal YouTube UI? Just copy the short's unique identifier from the URL and replace the unique identifier in any normal UI YouTube video.

amarshall• 8 months ago

It’s easier than that. Replace shorts with watch in the URL.

jeeeb• 8 months ago

I really hate all the AI filters in videos. It makes everyone look like fake humans. I find it hard to believe that anyone would actually prefer this.

halapro• 8 months ago

I don't find it hard to believe at all. Have you seen all the "240fps TVs" being sold for the past 15 years? They all apply some weird fake smoothing and people prefer them.

SilverElfin• 8 months ago

I’ve also noticed YouTube has unbanned many channels that were previously banned for overt supremacist and racist content. They get amplified a lot more now. Between that and AI slop, I feel like Google is speed running the changes X made over the last few years.

greenchair• 8 months ago

Agreed, encouraging diversity of ideas and free expression is great!

rc_mob• 8 months ago

What is this racist ass comment disguised as a "free speech" comment

windex• 8 months ago

There are entire fake persona videos these days. Leading scientists, economists, politicians, tech guys, are being impersonated wholesale on youtube.

acomjean• 8 months ago

I saw this today where "influencers" were taking real doctors from videos and using AI to have them pitch products.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/dec/05/ai-deepfakes...

tartoran• 8 months ago

Lawsuit? Seems like a slam dunk to me.

beezlebroxxxxxx• 8 months ago

Yeah, anyone in Canada has seen AI image ads and AI video ads on youtube purporting to feature or include prominent Canadian politicians (current PM and party leaders). Youtube seems to have just wholesale given up on moderating their ad content.

koolba• 8 months ago

What’s the point of doing this?

I don't understand the justification for the expense or complexity.

coliveira2• 8 months ago

Every engineer on Google is now measured on how much AI they use on their products. This is the predictable result.

AmbroseBierce2• 8 months ago

Talking about AI, Google, and shady tactics, I wouldn't be surprised if soon we discover they are purposefully adding video glitches (deformed characters and so on) in the first handful of iterations when using Veo video generation just so people gets used to trying 3 or 4 times before they receive a good one.

VTimofeenko• 8 months ago

Well the current models that cost per output sure love wasting those tokens on telling me how I am the greatest human being ever that only asks questions which get to the very heart of $SUBJECT.

AmbroseBierce2• 8 months ago

You are right! Would you like me to pretend I'm able to generate better responses if you just give me more input but will end up just wasting your time and your money? And with some luck when you inevitably end up frustrated you will conclude that it was your fault for not giving me good enough input and not mine for being unable to generate good output, in other words that to you just need to get better at GPTing.

choilive• 8 months ago

What PM thought this was a good idea? This has to be the result of some braindead we need more AI in the product mandate

muppetman• 8 months ago

They're heating the garbage slightly before serving it? Oh no.

delichon• 8 months ago

YouTube should keep their grubby hands off. And give that capability to us instead. I want the power to do personal AI edits built in. Give me a prompt line under each video. Like "replace English with Gaelic", "replace dad jokes with lorem ipsum", "make the narrator's face 25% more symmetrical", "replace the puppy with a xenomorph", "change the setting to Monument Valley", etc.

someothherguyy• 8 months ago

i wonder how many years (decades?) out this is still. it would be wild to be able to run something like that locally in a browser. although, it will probably be punishable by death by then.

absoluteunit13• 8 months ago

This made me chuckle lol

Aurornis7• 8 months ago

This link is to a Mastodon thread which links to another blog post which links to an actual source on ynetnews.com which quotes another article that has a quote from a YouTube rep. Save yourself the trouble and go straight to that article (although it's not great either): https://www.ynetnews.com/tech-and-digital/article/bj1qbwcklg

The key section:

Rene Ritchie, YouTube’s creator liaison, acknowledged in a post on X that the company was running “a small experiment on select Shorts, using traditional machine learning to clarify, reduce noise and improve overall video clarity—similar to what modern smartphones do when shooting video.”

So the "AI edits" are just a compression algorithm that is not that great.

filleduchaos3• 8 months ago

"Clarify, reduce noise, and improve overall video clarity" is not "just a compression algorithm", what? Words have meanings.

seanmcdirmid• 8 months ago

“a small experiment on select Shorts, using traditional machine learning to clarify, reduce noise and improve overall video clarity—similar to what modern smartphones do when shooting video.”

It looks like quality cleanup, but I can’t imagine many creators aren’t using decent camera tech and editing software for shorts.

Borealid2• 8 months ago

Noise is, because of its random nature, inherently less compressible than a predictable signal.

So counterintuitively, noise reduction improves compression ratios. In fact many video codecs are about determining which portion of the video IS noise that can be discarded, and which bits are visually important...

Forgeties79• 8 months ago

somnic• 8 months ago

YouTube is not hosting and serving uncompressed video so the apt comparison is not "compression" to "no compression" rather than "fancy experimental compression" to "tried and true compression."

kridsdale1• 8 months ago

THAT Rene Ritchie? Cool, I wondered what happened to him. I listened to his podcast all the time in the 2000s, when podcasts were synced to an iPod over USB before your commute.

tomhow• 8 months ago

We updated the link, thanks!

ChrisArchitect• 8 months ago

Being driven mad by conspiracy paranoia about 'face filters' (possible compression artifacts) is a great example of being AI-pilled.

And then the discourse is so riddled with misnomers and baited outrage that it goes nowhere.

The other example in submitted post isn't 'edits to videos' but rather the text descriptions of automated captions. The Gemini/AI engine not being very good at summarizing is a different issue.

JumpCrisscross• 8 months ago

FYI, I used to pay for YouTube Premium and have since stopped doing that. Deleting the app and letting ad blockers filter out this nonsense is a superior experience.

Strongly recommend. We’ll get local AIs that can skip the cruft soon enough anyway.

Animats2• 8 months ago

I'm seeing Youtube summary pictures which seem to be AI-generated. I was looking at [1], which is someone in China rebuilding old machines, and some of the newer summary pictures are not frames from the video. They show machines which are the sort of thing you might get by asking a Stable Diffusion type generator to generate a picture from the description.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/@linguoermechanic

sysworld• 8 months ago

Pretty sure this is a feature the uploader can use for YouTube to generate an (ai) thumbnail. I saw it on my channel once, but can't find it back now.

You can see it on many MANY channel thumbnails now. At least with the people I follow. I'm not a fan.

Animats2• 8 months ago

I'm seeing it on more videos now, and it's awful. It's just making stuff up. Badly.

Picking out the most relevant frame in the video was better.

alex1138• 8 months ago

Someone mentioned Insta is doing this too in this comment section

I just completely despair. What the fuck happened to the internet? Absolutely none of these CEOs give a shit. People need to face real punishments

karakot• 8 months ago

Slopification. On a plus side, I'm more offline later.

justinclift2• 8 months ago

Samuel Woolley, a disinformation expert at the University of Pittsburgh, said the company’s wording was misleading. “Machine learning is a subset of artificial intelligence,” he said. “This is AI.”

It's the other way around isn't it? "AI" is a subset of ML.

Ylpertnodi• 8 months ago

Trust issues with someone who is "a disinformation expert" - at a university, no less?

justinclift2• 7 months ago

Yes?

throwawayk7h• 8 months ago

"Machine learning is a subset of artificial intelligence,” he said.

No, gen AI is a subset of machine learning.

eschaton• 8 months ago

AI is the field. Machine learning is one of many specializations within the field. “Generative AI” is the colloquial term for using various machine learning models to generate text, images, video, code, etc.; that is, it’s a subfield of machine learning.

Other subfields of AI include things like search, speech and language understanding, knowledge representation, and so on. There’s a lot more to AI than machine learning and a lot more to machine learning than LLMs (“gen AI”).

j45• 8 months ago

This is wild.

I wonder if it will end up being treated as part of a codec instead of edits to the base film, and can then be re-run to undo the video's?

It feels like there needs to be a way to verify that what you uploaded is what's on the site.

ycombigrator• 8 months ago

Youtube is an AI training data set.

There is no way Google thinks it's in their interest to serve up clean data to anyone but themselves.

tantalor• 8 months ago

This story is several months old

Habgdnv• 8 months ago

An amateur tip that I sometimes use after I reencode something to check what i lost:

ffmpeg -i source.mkv -i suspect.mkv -filter_complex "blend=all_mode=difference" diff_output.mkv

I saw these claims before but still have not found someone to show a diff or post the source for comparison. It would be interesting.

rpastuszak• 8 months ago

Hehe, I occasionally use a similar approach for visual regression testing: https://untested.sonnet.io/notes/visual-snapshot-tests-cheap...

jbaber• 8 months ago

Thank you for this good idea and oneliner.

randoomed• 8 months ago

Jill Bearup posted a video about this a while ago, showing a short and the original side by side: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kd692naF-Cc (note the short is shown at 0:31)

Edit: The changes made by the ai are a lot more vissible in the higher quality video uploaded to patreon: https://www.patreon.com/posts/136994036 (this was also linked in the pinned comment on the youtube video)

sgerenser2• 8 months ago

The before/after on this just looks like compression artifacts/smoothing to me.

AnonHP• 8 months ago

It must be my eyes and the small screen on my phone. I couldn’t find any differences in the video on Patreon, which was annoying enough to watch with the actual comparison clip being just a couple of seconds or so, and I had to rewind and check again. I wish it had shown more of the comparisons. Most of the current video was just commentary.

tetris11• 8 months ago

I still can't see the differences in the patreon

IshKebab• 8 months ago

Yeah I also can't see the difference on the high quality video. I am on my phone though tbf.

Also, minus 100 points to Jill for being happy about being able to use AI to automatically edit out all the silence from her videos. That's far more annoying than any barely perceptible visual artifacts.

Why do people think wall-of-text videos are good?

nottorp4• 8 months ago

It's fine, I can't watch youtube anyway with ublock origin on any more :)

tim3333• 8 months ago

I use it with Origin Lite. Usually works. SponsorBlock is quite good also.

nottorp4• 8 months ago

That’s probably not Firefox?

saint_yossarian• 8 months ago

Works perfectly fine here on Firefox, no Premium.

nottorp4• 8 months ago

Last time i tried it loaded the main UI but the video never showed up.

bborud• 8 months ago

I don't understand why Youtube would do this. Both applying these kinds of "enhancements" to video and to do so without consent or even informing people. How is this a smart move?

We need more people experimenting with creating a better platform for content creators. Not least so people like Beato, but not as well known, don't constantly get harassed by fraudulent and incorrect copyright infringement claims.

conartist62• 8 months ago

It only takes one ambitious person

onion2k• 8 months ago

...to drive away the content producers that are key to the platform's success?

krapp2• 8 months ago

They probably believe these "enhancements" will increase engagement.

OR they need to justify the mountain of money they burned on AI somehow.

Also there are alternatives to Youtube in the Fediverse like PeerTube.

stainablesteel• 8 months ago

yeah it's foolish, the platform should just remain the platform, any attempt at improving engagement should be done by the creators or else this whole system would slowly collapse from frustration and move to a different website

mannanj• 8 months ago

If you make all content look like AI generated content, it normalizes AI generated content more and pushes their AI slop and AI generation products.

mark_l_watson• 8 months ago

Their edits on YouTube shorts are hideous but at least it is 100% obvious that artificial edits were applied.

I have a funny attitude towards Google: I am a big privacy nut, have read the principle books on privacy, etc. That said, usually running all Google web properties in DuckDuckGo web browser, I tweak my privacy settings, etc. and then still use Google properties.

YouTube is probably the highest value Google property for me (despite Gemini use, love using Google Cloud Platform, etc.)

I find that the availability of an infinite number of Qi Gong exercise videos, philosophy, tiny bit of politics, science, and nature videos that is it almost infinitely better than HBO, Netflix, etc. I am a paid subscriber to all these services so I am comparing Apples to Apples here.

I do hate spending 10 seconds opening a video and realizing that it was created artificially, but I immediately stop watching it so the overhead isn’t too bad.

One new feature I really like is if I am watching a long philosophy or science video, I paste the URI into Gemini and ask for a summary and to use what Gemini knows about me to suggest ways the material jives with my specific interests. After watching a long video it is very much worth my time getting a summary and comments that also pull in other references.

Sorry for the noisy reply here, but I am saying to use Google properties mindfully, balancing pros and cons, and just use the parts that are useful and only open up sharing private information when you get something tangible for it.

constantcrying• 8 months ago

The insanity of YouTube is their absolute dedication to forcefully introduce features nobody wants and to neglect all aspects of the site which are in desperate need of fixing.

The videos on the start page are still misaligned. Which looks almost hilariously amateurish.

silexia• 8 months ago

What alternatives do we have to youtube for creators?

nilslindemann• 8 months ago

It doesn't matter, YouTube is anyway unwatchable since everything gets autotranslated to hilarious garbage.

KellyCriterion• 8 months ago

The interesting thing is: They do this also in some of the EU countries, it looks to me.

YouTube caught making AI-edits to videos and adding misleading AI summaries

Related Stories