People feel strongly about AI generated content; this is a case where false positives can destroy credibility and disrupt careers.

"Works most of the time" isn't good enough here.

This isn't even at the level of the spam filter on your email account. Are there some false positives and negatives? Yes. Are there some people sending emails who are negatively affected by falsely ending up in the junk mail folder? Yes. Are we going to turn off spam filtering because of this? No. Why should we accept video spam any more than text spam?

They don’t seem to care about false positives anywhere else on the platform. Being at the mercy of automated Google systems comes with the territory.

Even worse if it's some attribute considered by the algorithm but not disclosed. "Likely AI" is enough to be damaging without even being tagged "Disclosed as AI"

This isn't a choice between "perfectly fine how things are now" and "destroying credibility". If it were, you're right - "good enough to be useful" wouldn't be a high enough bar.

Things are not perfectly fine how things are now. AI slop is destroying the internet. Tons of grifters are earning tons of money off YouTube by brainwashing millions of people with AI slop, including my mom. YouTube needs to do something and this seems feasible and far better than doing nothing.

I also think the false positive rate is going to be far lower than you think - especially if YouTube sets a caution threshold.

I'm open to other solutions but if you propose we just keep what we have now, then you are proposing an absolute disaster.