YouTube AI deletes war crimes evidence as 'extremist material'

Post by tpallarino » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 9:05 PM UTC

wyager wrote: post #26

YouTube is a really horrible service for content creators. For this type of content, you're practically probably best off with LiveLeak (which, incidentally, seems to be a much better source of breaking news than YouTube these days). Ideally, we'd all switch to LBRY or some sort of IPFS video distribution or something, but that will take time.

Post by stephen82 » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 9:07 PM UTC

the8472 wrote: post #151

viridian wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the bigger issue is that certain companies have near monopolies in their spaces to start with. For plebs like myself, youtube is really the only viable option I have to distribute video media if I hope to build an audience. The fact that you effectively can't mount an alternative to facebook, youtube, etc due to network effects is the larger disease, and this is one of many symptoms.

I think the only solution is a distributed and decentralized web. Distributed hosting of static content is a sorta-solved problem. But curating, linking and discoverability (which require mutating content) is a lot harder due to the trust anchor problem.

   BitChute is a peer to peer content sharing platform. 
   Our mission is to put people and free speech first. 
   It is free to join, create and upload your own content to share with others.

Post by josinalvo » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 9:09 PM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #139

aiyodev wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to pick on you because this seems to be a popular opinion but I would just like to point out the insanity of your what you just wrote. "as long as they don't abuse copyright" Would we delete videos of the liberation of concentration camps if there was Nickelback music playing in the background? This just demonstrates how successful media companies have been in distorting the true purpose of copyright laws: to pro…

Like, Nickelback is in the original footage or someone overalyed the track on top of the footage? I would imagine if this ever really happened it would be fine in the former, and muted in the latter. You're forgetting that 'promote...' means give the creator control of that content for the purpose of limiting access and making money. Promote in the sense that it becomes possible to actually sell artistic works like c…

Post by flamedoge » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 9:11 PM UTC

the8472 wrote: post #151

viridian wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the bigger issue is that certain companies have near monopolies in their spaces to start with. For plebs like myself, youtube is really the only viable option I have to distribute video media if I hope to build an audience. The fact that you effectively can't mount an alternative to facebook, youtube, etc due to network effects is the larger disease, and this is one of many symptoms.

I think the only solution is a distributed and decentralized web. Distributed hosting of static content is a sorta-solved problem. But curating, linking and discoverability (which require mutating content) is a lot harder due to the trust anchor problem.

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 9:11 PM UTC

mustacheemperor wrote: post #75

monocasa wrote: post #5

Have they checked with YouTube to see if the files are actually deleted? Like just because their gateway won't give you access to it doesn't necessarily mean that the bits have been scrubbed on the back end. Also: here's a project to archive this information. https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-7909-syrian_archive

Unfortunately many of the original uploaders have since died in the war, and the deleted playlists were the only visible place the videos were accessible.