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

191–200 of 219 posts

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#191

Post by mzw_mzw »

makomk wrote: post #188
mzw_mzw wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's amazing how people act like they have the "right" to post some content anywhere. It's amazing how, every time a private organization is criticized for how it handles speech on its platform, some tedious rando jumps out of the woodwork to smugly lecture everyone about how private organizations don't have legal obligations to host anything. Yes. We know. We know, we know, we know, we all know. The First Amendment…

It's amazing how widespread the idea that that, because it's legal for private organisations to take down whatever content they like, no-one should criticise them for it has become. However could this belief that benefits those with immense influence over the public discourse have become so common?

I don't think there's any kind of actual conspiracy going on; it's just that this argument is a convenient political soldier. If these companies were censoring the other side politically, it's the other political side that would be deploying it.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#192

Post by spash »

logicallee wrote: post #173
logicallee wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to a recent UN report to be released in a few months and which I've gotten an advanced copy of, YCombinator is the worst organization in the history of modern civilization. That was a satirical sentence. Now let's examine your argument as applied directly to this very comment. Why is it in YCombinator's (the organization that runs this forum we're both posting in) interest to "keep up" this comment, which i…

I've been downvoted, but I think people didn't get my point at all. There is no way that YCombinator is removing this comment, just because they host this platform, and for emphasis I pretend to be critical. There is no WAY youtube would remove a video of an exploding samsung, just because samsung is a partner.

The downvote(s) on your comment were really saddening, though I was expecting exactly that when reading it few hours ago. This is sadly a trend with any discussion platform becoming "popular" past a certain threshold - the presence of forum warriors who "moderate" the content based on the few initial words is only going to rise up until everything becomes Reddit.

That said, I think your post was well written and right on spot - but the first sentence is a so obvious trigger that there are always going to be people that won't even bother reading past it. After all, there's so much to moderate and --- "Oh, hey! There's another post that looks dangerous! I've just noticed some words!"

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#193

Post by awqrre »

teekert wrote: post #22

I love such news, their comment threads are the best source of funny Note 7 jokes :) I can't find it now but I saw an image of a terrorist with a Note 7 belt under his jacket. Nice. Why can't they think of a fun way to deal with this PR disaster, how hard can it be? Jeez what are they thinking??

Samsung probably gave ideas to terrorists

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#194

Post by Gibbon1 »

oldmanjay wrote: post #182
Gibbon1 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On on the side of, society extends corporations a lot of rights and protection. Stand to reason that demands that they serve the public interest aren't unreasonable. Especially in this case where the claim is corporations are abusing a right; copyright and trademark protection.

Which in this case, just to keep things concrete, would be in the service of compelling people to host objectionable speech against their will.

You want your common carrier protection or not?

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#195

Post by majormajor »

makomk wrote: post #188
mzw_mzw wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's amazing how people act like they have the "right" to post some content anywhere. It's amazing how, every time a private organization is criticized for how it handles speech on its platform, some tedious rando jumps out of the woodwork to smugly lecture everyone about how private organizations don't have legal obligations to host anything. Yes. We know. We know, we know, we know, we all know. The First Amendment…

It's amazing how widespread the idea that that, because it's legal for private organisations to take down whatever content they like, no-one should criticise them for it has become. However could this belief that benefits those with immense influence over the public discourse have become so common?

Your tone suggests some sort of nefarious plot, but in the US that idea is widely consistent with fairly prevalent preferences for strong private property rights and a distrust of regulation that predates mass media.

A business owner is seen as more like the average person than is a regulator or other academic "public discourse"-spouting person.

Today they're telling Youtube what to do, tomorrow they're telling your company what to do...

See also positions on NIMBYism vs "it's my land, why can't I build whatever I want?", Uber and AirBNB vs existing regulations, and many others.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#196

Post by logicallee »

spash wrote: post #192
logicallee wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been downvoted, but I think people didn't get my point at all. There is no way that YCombinator is removing this comment, just because they host this platform, and for emphasis I pretend to be critical. There is no WAY youtube would remove a video of an exploding samsung, just because samsung is a partner.

The downvote(s) on your comment were really saddening, though I was expecting exactly that when reading it few hours ago. This is sadly a trend with any discussion platform becoming "popular" past a certain threshold - the presence of forum warriors who "moderate" the content based on the few initial words is only going to rise up until everything becomes Reddit. That said, I think your post was well written and righ…

On reflection and keeping the very useful posting guidelines in mind, I edited my comment into its present form, likely after you read it. (The original first sentence originally contained over-the-top trigger words like literally being an example of Godwin's law, as a demonstration that this was insufficent to cause it's removal.) I decided to edit it into its (still satirical) present form because the HN guidelines about making substantive comments are good and improve the site for everyone. Although the original phrasing invoking Godwin's law still wouldn't have been removed, and therefore still would have served as an apt demonstration, I think the present phrasing is better.

Actually the fact that my original phrasing did not meet the nominal guidelines on civility (because it invoked Godwin's law) whereas this one does is an important point: after all the video obeys YouTube's nominal guidelines. (For example it doesn't contain nudity.) So my present, quite civil (in line with HN guidelines) phrasing is the best analogy/demonstration.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#197

Post by city41 »

mzw_mzw wrote: post #152
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…

>It's amazing how people act like they have the "right" to post some content anywhere. It's amazing how, every time a private organization is criticized for how it handles speech on its platform, some tedious rando jumps out of the woodwork to smugly lecture everyone about how private organizations don't have legal obligations to host anything. Yes. We know. We know, we know, we know, we all know. The First Amendment…

Perhaps people at HN know. But I'd argue internet users in general don't. Just look at the outcry that happens when reddit censors stuff.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#199

Post by adrr »

icebraining wrote: post #183
adrr wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US government just needs to enforce laws against corporations abusing the DMCA. Samsung committed perjury by saying they hold the copyright to these videos.

Not quite. Samsung claimed they own the copyright to some work, and that this video is in violation of such copyright (for example, the videos could include a photo or text owned by Samsung). I don't think the perjury clause applies if they're just wrong about the latter.

They claimed copyright on a Grand Theft Audio screen capture video that had the grenade model substituted for a cell phone. No way you could argue you own copyright on that.

Re: Samsung 'blocks' exploding Note 7 parody videos

#200

Post by wildmusings »

city41 wrote: post #197
mzw_mzw wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's amazing how people act like they have the "right" to post some content anywhere. It's amazing how, every time a private organization is criticized for how it handles speech on its platform, some tedious rando jumps out of the woodwork to smugly lecture everyone about how private organizations don't have legal obligations to host anything. Yes. We know. We know, we know, we know, we all know. The First Amendment…

Perhaps people at HN know. But I'd argue internet users in general don't. Just look at the outcry that happens when reddit censors stuff.

Outcry is one of the mechanisms that dissuades censorship on privately-owned mediums. Let's have more outcry please.
Post reply on HN