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

YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 217 posts

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#61

Post by s73v3r_ »

fmihaila wrote: post #52
s73v3r_ wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"False/misleading videos that perpetuate a scam."

> "False/misleading videos that perpetuate a scam." You seem to be implying that Jones' videos are truthful/informative and totally-not-a-scam, while the videos in the article, which actually contained educational content, were false, misleading, and perpetuating a scam. Meanwhile, Jones has a supplement business that pulled an estimated $15 mil over two years (some estimate $25 mil) [1]. Here is a sampling of review…

"You seem to be implying that Jones' videos are truthful/informative and totally-not-a-scam, while the videos in the article, which actually contained educational content, were false, misleading, and perpetuating a scam."

I can assure you wholeheartedly that I am implying that Alex Jones videos are squarely in the "false/misleading/perpetuating a scam" camp.

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#62

Post by maxerickson »

merinowool wrote: post #57
maxerickson wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So should it be illegal to run a curated platform?

To be fair information is a weapon and there should be no free reign for anyone. If you are on purpose suppressing some information to fulfil political agenda - that should be a criminal act.

So what's a political agenda?

Is the promotion of cats a political agenda? Can allcats.com take down videos of dogs?

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#63

Post by joew42k »

xstephen95x wrote: post #4

Who is YouTube to decide what I can and can't watch?

You can decide to not watch youtube.

TV stations decide what shows they want to air, and which ones they don't. And nobody calls it censorship. Youtube feels like public infrastructure. But legally, it's no different than a TV station deciding to cancel a show.

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#64

Post by kawfey »

kristofferR wrote: post #7

YouTube will probably remove fitness videos soon, since some people invariably are stupid and will hurt themselves with the exercises on display, a completely analogous situation.

Soon to be followed by train videos, which could put people in harms way to view rare trains, then siren videos, as prolonged exposure to high intensity sound can cause hearing loss. And storm spotting as well, clearly the only safe space when there are large threatening clouds in the sky is in a 300ft underground nuclear silo...

OH NO DID I JUST SAY NUCLEAR? banned.

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#65

Post by joew42k »

vertexFarm wrote: post #59
joew42k wrote: post #54

Youtube is a private company and can do whatever they want with their own website. Nobody's stopping makers of these videos from hosting the videos themselves. This is not censorship in the way we have traditionally understood. It only feels like it because Youtube is where the biggest audience is. It's the same whenever Facebook penalizes a post in the timeline, or whenever Google hides content from the search resul…

There should be a social network for lonely, security-obsessed linux people who refuse to partake in social media. Maybe we should start raising homing pigeons and send little notes to each other. I need to get my ham license one of these days.

Not until we can have independent audits of the pigeons and the freedom to distribute forked pigeon breeds.

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#66

Post by JoeAltmaier »

joew42k wrote: post #63
xstephen95x wrote: post #4

Who is YouTube to decide what I can and can't watch?

You can decide to not watch youtube. TV stations decide what shows they want to air, and which ones they don't. And nobody calls it censorship. Youtube feels like public infrastructure. But legally, it's no different than a TV station deciding to cancel a show.

A TV station has limited bandwidth. They have a constant ongoing algorithm to choose what to fit in there.

YouTube could keep all videos forever. There can be no commercial reason to 'cancel' a YouTube video. So we know that this decision is almost completely unrelated to the TV Station reasons.

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#67

Post by vertexFarm »

jerf wrote: post #14
pboutros wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between "removing false/misleading videos that perpetuate a scam" and Fahrenheit 451

Depends on who gets to decide what "false/misleading" is. I'm not sure how this could be any less transparent. I personally see less than no reason to trust YouTube's judgment in these matters.

It's interesting. I think we're at a strange period in history where personal speech can reach such a huge audience, thus new ways of suppressing speech are being invented.

Youtube is a private service, thus they can remove content as they wish. Of course, most forms of historical media have also removed or suppressed controversial content. But in the old days it was preemptive. There was only so much room in a newspaper, you had to own presses and a distribution network, and they didn't hire just any schmoe to write columns.

It was a proactive system of censorship. They got people invested in a career of finding the proper stories and promoting what was acceptable to the establishment. Obviously common people could say whatever they like in their daily lives, but their freedom to put content into a newspaper or television show for all to see was extremely limited.

We have enormous freedom in self-publishing mass media today. So much content is being created that no mortal person can serve as gatekeeper and pick and choose what gets published like a newspaper editor could. So on one hand, we're living in a utopia of free speech. But new ways are being devised to automatically manage content all the time. And even though human moderators don't catch everything, but they slowly do what they can.

There are some genuinely harmful ideas out there, of course. Some things that ought to be restricted. Who gets to decide? Is it right for a private company to choose? I doubt it, but private companies have always been choosing what gets into media. In the past their decisions were much more totalitarian than today.

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#68

Post by JoeAltmaier »

tptacek wrote: post #30
politician wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_owned_public_space YouTube essentially has a monopoly on video. Monopolies and other actors can be forced to comply with public space laws or to respect principles that normally apply only to the government.

How exactly does Youtube have a monopoly on video? What's the underlying scarcity they're exploiting?

Well, they are the de-facto curator of the bulk of our civilizations videos. Lets be honest, if you aren't on YouTube your chances of being searched/promoted/seen are greatly diminished. Maybe to nearly zero.

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#69

Post by joew42k »

kristofferR wrote: post #37
pboutros wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between "removing false/misleading videos that perpetuate a scam" and Fahrenheit 451

The channels in question aren't accused of containing false/misleading videos, they're accused of containing disallowed facts. Noone disputes that modafinil promotes wakefulness or that magnesium makes many sleepy.

Websites have always been allowed to decide which facts to allow on their site. Right now, if I visited an anti-vaxxer forum, and posted "vaccines don't cause autism" in the comments, I'm sure it would be removed.

So why is youtube any different?

Re: YouTube Is Removing Some Nootropics Channels

#70

Post by Analemma_ »

vertexFarm wrote: post #59
joew42k wrote: post #54

Youtube is a private company and can do whatever they want with their own website. Nobody's stopping makers of these videos from hosting the videos themselves. This is not censorship in the way we have traditionally understood. It only feels like it because Youtube is where the biggest audience is. It's the same whenever Facebook penalizes a post in the timeline, or whenever Google hides content from the search resul…

There should be a social network for lonely, security-obsessed linux people who refuse to partake in social media. Maybe we should start raising homing pigeons and send little notes to each other. I need to get my ham license one of these days.

> There should be a social network for lonely, security-obsessed linux people who refuse to partake in social media.

Where do you think you are? ;)

Post reply on HN