story
That might be as simple as checking for the existence of legal documents claiming copyright infringement, or as reading a web page stating “we already removed X other copies of this file”.
Neither is a fail-safe way of doing such a review, but doing a thorough review might be expensive even for Google. Does anybody know how many such reviews they do each day?
It might also be a bug on their tooling to assist human reviewers.
Regardless -- and I know this is a "how the world should be, not how it is" type thing -- I really think the initial decision should not be allowed to be made by an algorithm. At the very most, an algorithm should be allowed to flag something for human review, but no action is taken until the human has a chance to review it and decide if the flag is warranted or not.
Also, just the absurdity that a human would review a file containing only "1" and decide the decision to flag it was correct.
Problems shouldn't get fixed just because they got enough likes and reshares on Twitter.
