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

Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 187 posts

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#141

Post by coldtea »

vacri wrote: post #121
odiroot wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aha, so big US companies are our police now. I share your fear. The "kosher" content would be now defined by some faceless person in NY/SF.

By 'our police', do you mean 'actively curating their own content'? Do you call your local librarian a cop as well?

Do you call the local censor a "curator" too?

Besides, my local librarian doesn't decide what books the library will have (what's this, USSR?). They do the initial ordering management, but library members can request any book and have it ordered.

There's a mechanism for us curating our own content: we decide to which pages/friends we subscribe. How about that?

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#142

Post by thinkingemote »

hueving wrote: post #136
matt4077 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree that traditional media outlets "hype up the terror". If you compare the coverage of, for example, the recent attacks in London and the fire you're referring to, they seemed to get about equal billing. On the smaller scale, violence will get more prominent coverage, yes. But that's just a reflection of public interest, and how much intent makes a subjective difference. News outlets like the BBC or the Gu…

How often do you hear about shootings in South Chicago in world news? 294 people have died there so far this year![1] Terrorist events should be treated like any other murders and people will very quickly stop caring. They are just hyped up by the media to drive views and the governments love it because it allows them to expand their power. 1. https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2017-chicago-murders

I used to hold this very view but now I don't watch the news. The reason why I don't hold this view is in the very name and nature of the news, it's "new". Everyday commonplace events even horrific ones are not new and therefore are not part of the news. Choose to not watch.

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#143

Post by rogual »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #105
DuskStar wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, the entire situation with Evergreen College is closer to being an alt-Right propaganda piece than a leftist one. Screaming at and demanding the resignation of a professor essentially for saying that "On a college campus, one's right to speak - or to be - must never be based on skin color" looks pretty bad, you know? The fact it was produced by leftists who need a far better grasp of optics really doesn't change…

Pardon me, but your view is ridiculous! Or are you claiming that the people at Evergreen are all secret members of the Pepe Brotherhood and that they are not holding their leftist views honestly?

I don't think DuskStar was claiming it was a false-flag protest, just that it made the people doing it look bad.

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#145

Post by jamespo »

bobabooey02 wrote: post #131
3pt14159 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't installing a filter into the browser they're OPENLY addressing a problematic issue on YouTube, one of many, many video hosting websites. Nothing stops a terrorist from getting a computer, an internet connection, and hosting his own damn video calling for the murder of women and children. When you call for violence against non-combatants you're breaking the law in every single western country. If there wer…

They didn't say they were going to start removing videos with illegal content, they already do that. They said that they were going to start removing videos that don't break any rules, yet the company deems them unsavory. Which is incredibly frustrating since 1) YT has become the center of our changing culture, and 2) not everyone lines up with the PC Californian culture that dominates large multinational corporation…

Where does that say they're removing them?

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#146

Post by JetSpiegel »

xapata wrote: post #81
DuskStar wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are Leftist movements in the US that are arguably just as violent as those on the alt-Right. What's the chance that these policies apply to both sides equally? Given the history, I'd say not much. And I don't think that's a good thing. EDIT: Unless someone is saying that AntiFa ISN'T violent?

> What's the chance ...? How about doing some old-fashioned data gathering for the benefit of the community? Document all violent events, how many YouTube videos are posted of each, how many are removed and how long it takes for each to be pulled down. Without data, it's just conspiracy theory.

Considering there are several hours of video uploaded to YouTube per second, this is nigh impossible for someone without Google-level resources.

And that's just the last two points of your comment. The first requires a nation state.

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#147

Post by jamespo »

hueving wrote: post #132
3pt14159 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't installing a filter into the browser they're OPENLY addressing a problematic issue on YouTube, one of many, many video hosting websites. Nothing stops a terrorist from getting a computer, an internet connection, and hosting his own damn video calling for the murder of women and children. When you call for violence against non-combatants you're breaking the law in every single western country. If there wer…

Murder sure; however, it said this: >videos that contain inflammatory religious or supremacist content It's very easy to claim content is inflammatory or supremacist . This will be highly subjective, which is the problem. I personally know people here in the bay area that would have no problem labelling lots of campaign talk by Trump with those tags.

OMG a multinational doesn't share my precise political bias

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#148

Post by rmah »

coldtea wrote: post #141
vacri wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By 'our police', do you mean 'actively curating their own content'? Do you call your local librarian a cop as well?

Do you call the local censor a "curator" too? Besides, my local librarian doesn't decide what books the library will have (what's this, USSR?). They do the initial ordering management, but library members can request any book and have it ordered. There's a mechanism for us curating our own content: we decide to which pages/friends we subscribe. How about that?

"Besides, my local librarian doesn't decide what books the library will have"

Um, of course they do.

Re: Four steps we’re taking today to fight online terror

#149

Post by [deleted] »

coldtea wrote: post #141
vacri wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By 'our police', do you mean 'actively curating their own content'? Do you call your local librarian a cop as well?

Do you call the local censor a "curator" too? Besides, my local librarian doesn't decide what books the library will have (what's this, USSR?). They do the initial ordering management, but library members can request any book and have it ordered. There's a mechanism for us curating our own content: we decide to which pages/friends we subscribe. How about that?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN