Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 219 posts

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#161

Post by hk__2 »

odbol_ wrote: post #142
bisby wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing how people act like they have the "right" to post some content anywhere. Youtube, facebook, reddit, hacker news are all private organizations. They are not legally obligated to host your content (in some cases, like copyright infringement, they are legally obligated to NOT host your content). The only thing that keeps these sites from arbitrarily censoring their users is money. If facebook deleted every…

This is why the Distributed Web is so important. We need to be sharing all our videos/content in a P2P manner so it can't get censored.

That makes content discovery very difficult.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#162

Post by jMyles »

Scirra_Tom wrote: post #160
jMyles wrote: post #34

I love you all. :-) Here we are again, and this thread is full of comments about whether this was afoul of DMCA or whether there's a way to adjust the system so that these claims will be more costly to the claimant. We need to break open the head here, people! We're scientists, right? Step back from your political ideologies and your fears and tell me what the real problem is with this biological system. Right: it's…

Isn't this going from one (perceived extreme) of making sole actors able to bring content down to another extreme where no-one can bring anything down? Does fixing the issue really mean making all material (copyrighted or not) always available and impossible to take down?

I'm less sure.

I don't think that there is a per se connection between the definition of a right (ofI think that the human) or tendency (of the internet organism) as absolute with a viewpoint which is politically extreme. (In other words: sometimes the moderate position is the one which seems absolute, and the position of relativity or balance is the extreme one).

The notion that speech and expression always supersede "intellectual property" seems to be the tendency of the distributed network. I'm prepared to argue that holding on to industry-age statues regarding "intellectual property" (ie, that some actors justly have authority to change the shape of the network in order to subvert access which they claim violates their IP) is an extreme position - an extreme clinging to policies which are unrealistic and inapplicable to the internet.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#163

Post by gm-conspiracy »

detaro wrote: post #125
xenophonf wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an aside, why aren't symmetric last-mile Internet connections a thing? Is it a technical, physical capacity thing, is it a customer demand thing, or what? The last time I had symmetric bandwidth was back in the days of ISDN.

Combination of things. For fiber, direct Ethernet connections, etc that have clearly separated channels symmetric is fairly common. In ADSL and cable network the spectrum is shared for up- and download channels, so they have to balance it. And since marketing mostly happens over download speeds and most people don't upload very much, offering eg. 50/10 instead of 30/30 makes more sense. I don't know why basically all…

People don't upload very often because their upstream sucks.

This is chicken-and-egg bullshit.

I am sure it is not that difficult to provision.

The area I resided in, had only DSL.

Later, a cable company ran FTTP, with a ONT outside, that converted the fiber to coax-DOCSIS, and then requires the usage of a cable modem? The ONT has a RJ-45 port, but the cable company does not know how to enable it.

The DSL was oversubscribed, and provisioned for less than 6Mbps/768kbps. However, it was only $35/mo.

Once the cable company offered service, it was $60 (plus modem rental or purchase) for 6Mbps/1Mbps.

Many people switched to the fake-fiber cable network, freeing up capacity on the DSL, so now the DSL is provisioned at 12Mbps, but upload is still 768kbps, and still $35/mo.

To get 5Mbps upload via the cable company would require a plan costing over $100/mo. That is their upper limit of upload speed. They can do 105Mbps down (closer to $150/mo), but 5Mbps up is the max.

I would love to have even 3Mbps upstream from the DSL provider

For now, I can use LTE for periodic uploading, where I can get 20 to 50Mbps, but I am paying much more for that privilege.

But, when time is money, I cannot afford to wait 3 hours for data to transfer at 768kbps (not considering encapsulation - yes, the DSL is PPPoE).

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#164

Post by wtetzner »

sedachv wrote: post #139
LukeShu wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ma Bell and ISPs are odd examples, because their monopoly or quasi-monopoly positions are possible because of government involvement.

> Ma Bell and ISPs are odd examples, because their monopoly or quasi-monopoly positions are possible because of government involvement. False: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly

Doesn't enforcement of copyright fall under government intervention?

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#165

Post by gm-conspiracy »

kijin wrote: post #88
mountaineer22 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I understood you. Benevolent 501c3, maybe? Really, the answer would be in symmetric last-mile internet connections, no? Having the ability to host and distribute/stream video would change many things in these industries.

It will have to be P2P of some sort. Even with full-duplex gagabit fiber, there's no way for one person to stream HD video to thousands of viewers simultaneously on a home or office connection,

This is exactly the sort of implementation I was imagining.

By participating, you would be caching content for other users.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#166

Post by Scirra_Tom »

jMyles wrote: post #162
Scirra_Tom wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this going from one (perceived extreme) of making sole actors able to bring content down to another extreme where no-one can bring anything down? Does fixing the issue really mean making all material (copyrighted or not) always available and impossible to take down?

I'm less sure. I don't think that there is a per se connection between the definition of a right (ofI think that the human) or tendency (of the internet organism) as absolute with a viewpoint which is politically extreme . (In other words: sometimes the moderate position is the one which seems absolute, and the position of relativity or balance is the extreme one). The notion that speech and expression always superse…

I always get uncomfortable when copyright issues are conflated into free speech issues. I feel it's generally used incorrectly to give more legitimacy basically to people wanting to distribute material they are not permitted to.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#168

Post by jMyles »

Scirra_Tom wrote: post #166
jMyles wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm less sure. I don't think that there is a per se connection between the definition of a right (ofI think that the human) or tendency (of the internet organism) as absolute with a viewpoint which is politically extreme . (In other words: sometimes the moderate position is the one which seems absolute, and the position of relativity or balance is the extreme one). The notion that speech and expression always superse…

I always get uncomfortable when copyright issues are conflated into free speech issues. I feel it's generally used incorrectly to give more legitimacy basically to people wanting to distribute material they are not permitted to.

Two responses - a weaker (but still sufficient) one and then a stronger one:

The weak argument is, "look at the current case! This was clearly, obviously not Samsung's IP and yet they were able to effectively erase a meme from a popular platform for a short time." This is sufficient to show that indeed it is a free speech issue.

The stronger argument is that the internet doesn't seem to recognize this concept of "material that they are not permitted to distribute." Introducing it has meant (often intentionally) causing all sorts of damage to various protocols and services. Even if it makes sense in the context of industry-age culture (and I'm not sure it does), it seems to go decidedly against nature now.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#169

Post by interpol_p »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #151
bisby wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing how people act like they have the "right" to post some content anywhere. Youtube, facebook, reddit, hacker news are all private organizations. They are not legally obligated to host your content (in some cases, like copyright infringement, they are legally obligated to NOT host your content). The only thing that keeps these sites from arbitrarily censoring their users is money. If facebook deleted every…

Huh? I absolutely have a right to come out and publicly say that YouTube or Facebook is practicing censorship of ideas for political or financial gain on their platforms, and express the fact that this is a bad thing for users. Expressing such an opinion is not tantamount to stating I have any "rights" under their platforms or being entitled; you are connecting those dots in your head without basis just to be snide.

You have the right to say it, but where are you going to say it where it will actually be heard?

All the big platforms are private and could hypothetically block your message without offering you any recourse.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#170

Post by hyperhopper »

There seems to be a lot of people saying the government should do something about this.

Keep in mind, this is not related to DMCA or copyright at all: this is a software system in use by a private company. No laws were broken, it is just extremely scummy behavior.

Post reply on HN