this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2025
367 points (97.2% liked)
Technology
74496 readers
3346 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Do words not matter anymore when it comes to 'journalism?'
They didn't secretly do anything. This was publicly.
If it wasn't, we wouldn't fucking know would we?
I think the better question for you is if you think words don't have real definitions, and do they? What do 'secretly' or 'publicly' really mean? Do they rely on explicit knowledge or just the ability to maybe figure it out on your own?
So I can steal from you without telling you, then when you find out, I can claim it was public knowledge because you found out after the fact?
Yeah, finding out about something that was done without your knowledge or consent beforehand isn't doing it secretly if you find out about it later!
It would be a lot like stealing from me while I'm looking directly at you and you don't tell me we're both on national television. That would be a way more accurate representation.
"Secretly tested" meaning they didn't inform users when they started doing it. Y'know, like any experimental feature is called out and explained? I hope you're just having a bad day because this is some pretty rough reading comprehension
Both, bad day, but I stand by it. It's not a secret if what you're doing is immediately in public view.
Doesn't fit the bill whatsoever:
secret /sē′krĭt/
adjective Kept hidden from knowledge or view; concealed. "a secret identity; a secret passageway." Not expressed; inward. "secret desires."
"YouTube brazenly....." Would have been a way more appropriate tagline
If you give a letter to a postman, and the recipient asks why you put "P.S: I love you" on an official piece of documentation, your first thought wouldn't be "that damn postman, opening my mail to try and enhance it".
The same is true for YouTube. People have been uploading videos for decades with them ending up on the platform the way they are uploaded, so it stands to reason that longtime users would expect this behaviour to continue, especially if there have been no Comms around any changes.
Of course Google isn't to be trusted, and anyone trusting YouTube to be ethical clearly isn't paying attention to anything. But that doesn't change the fact that youtube have intentionally hidden this change from their user base. Sure, the result was public facing, but the cause was kept secret; and that's the nuance you're overlooking.
There's definitely a middle ground somewhere between both of our perspectives. I didn't write it out, but you did bring up a great point regarding them notoriously being a shitty company to the people they rely on for income as well as the people they exploit for endcome, the creators and viewers respectively.
I mean on a very strict technicality, I suppose part of this is secretive, but I still think there's a better word out there for it. There's absolutely no way they thought they could alter many many videos and it not be caught. I don't think their intent was secretive. It has the same feel as lying by omission. Not quite a lie but could technically be classified as one.
I'm really tired, and I got to get to bed. If you're willing to continue tomorrow I'd be down.
Yeah I can appreciate that take mate. The level of audacity they would need to think something like this wouldn't be noticed is almost unimaginable. Lying by omission does feel like the best comparison to make regarding this.
Rest easy friend; there will be plenty more corporate nonsense for us all to jawdrop over tomorrow!
That you are not wrong about one bit lmao. We live in an evil cartoon
Hidden from view? No. Hidden from knowledge of it being done? Yes, therefore it was done in secret.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study
Public now. Secretive at the time.
It's a public facing platform.
Your two braincells are misfiring, bud.
So by that logic, everything they do is public, whether they talk about it or not?
No. But the thing we're talking about is. It's a lot like farting in an elevator with just one other person and trying to convince them they did it. You both know who did it and what they did pretty quickly.
More like you've gotten in the elevator fart-free with someone many times before, but then they planned to fart next time without telling you. We all know who did it, the problem is that the other person wasn't aware that what happens in that elevator ride was going to change because they kept it a secret until the doors shut, and then there was no way out