You're not pro-LGBT if you think trans women aren't women.
I think you meant to say "You're not pro-LGBT if you think women aren't women."
Why are you segregating "trans women" as different than just "women"?
YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
421–430 of 744 posts
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#422Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube gets to decide what a "bigoted ideology" is. That's a sweeping term that can be used as a catch-all for videos they don't like. I think that this will be bad for the platform overall -- an increase in censorship is never good.
An increase in censorship is very frequently good. Consider a discussion forum that never banned any users or removed any spam. It quickly becomes very difficult to have a meaningful discussion when a third of the posts are "CHEEP ROLE X bUY NOW" and another third are racial hatred.
That's an oversimplification, and I don't think I need to elaborate past that.
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#423I'm starting to think that comment sections on news sites are a really bad idea. At first I thought NPR and the like were cowards for removing theirs. It's bad enough that NYT can be pretty biased on its own, but the comment sections are always full of low-tier thinking that just push whatever narrative is currently in the Overton window. What I find distressing is how people remark that a telecom and advertising gia…
Although any hateful speech is terrible of course, I think censoring like this is a bad idea. Like other conversations about freedom of speech on HN it will eventually lead to talking about banning non hateful but extreme ideas like flat earth and anti vax. While ridiculous as they are, I think it would be equally ridiculous to ban them. What's the line you draw when you decide what gets to be promoted. Maybe certain…
I'm also okay banning anti-vax ideas, in defense of the community in general, and in defense in specific of those vulnerable few who can't be immunized and rely on herd immunity.
Foregoing vaccination imposes an as-yet-unaccounted externality on the community; you put everyone at risk by not vaccinating yourself or your kids, and there's no way for the vulnerable (those relying on herd immunity) to know who around them will put them at risk.
It goes way beyond an individual choice, to vaccinate or not. That decision has impacts far beyond the individual's life.
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#424Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do any of those places host a substantial portion of the public political debate? If any of those places banned people, would that significantly reduce the ability of those people to meaningfully participated in the public political debate?
Probably not, but then I don't think it's a like to like comparison, youtube is more of a broadcast system than anything, it's closer to TV or Newspapers were pre youtube and nobody has the automatic right to TV airtime or to be printed in a newspaper.
It's not close to TV, in any way shape or form other than the fact that it's a video on a screen. Regular people don't put things on TV. That has always been a privilege for the very rich, or for local governments in the case of public access TV. Either way, not something regular people have access to.
It's closer to pamphlets than newspapers, in that regular people can make and distribute pamphlets, whereas regular people have never been able to put whatever they want in newspapers. We would be rightly upset if either the government or common carriers refused service to political groups distributing pamphlets.
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#425Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Probably because it's literally what YouTube is? That's obviously not true. A list of banned content has been place for most of its existence, e.g porn and illegal content.
YouTube started out as a way to empower people to post home videos on the internet, a place for every day people to share video. And you're right, it has always restricted illegal content. And that's a good line to draw. So.. What's illegal about this new content? Or what has changed that they now think they're ready to judge what is extreme and hateful? Or what has changed that they now think they even should?
Porn isn't illegal, but has always been banned on youtube.
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#426Earlier quoted context omitted.
>A white nationalist uprising in Europe would be deadlier (again) than Islamic extremists taking over most middle eastern nations due to the resources that will be available to them. Reckless speculation considering the latter did happen. You're fearmongering in order to drive censorship and oppression of viewpoints you disagree with.
How is he fearmongering? A white nationalist uprising is quite literally relatively recent European history, and resulted in the torture and slaughter of tens of millions. Before Al Queda, the West's biggest fear was domestic white nationalist terrorists like Timothy McVeigh. EDIT: It's very disturbing that so many people don't understand what the Nazi platform was all about. The supremacy of the "Aryan Race" was lit…
[deleted]
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#427Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think it's possible that without the propaganda of white supremacy, the German public would have been less willing to go to war?
Also please be aware that you will see terms like "white" supremacy be used in these discussions instead of more appropriate terms like "Aryan" to make the topic easier to approach for an American audience.
I believe that's what is called "a distinction without a difference".
You can argue that whatever your local xenophobic hatreds you have going on aren't technically white supremacy, because you have different historical and cultural understandings of race etc, but at the end of the day, your hating haters sure seem to hate basically the same people as our hating haters, so I'm not sure why it's worth arguing about the distinction between the two groups.
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#428You're not pro-LGBT if you think trans women aren't women.
This isn't my opinion. I will happily call people by whatever pronoun they wish to be called. That's just common decency in my opinion.
That comment was in reference to this story, it looks like I got the quote wrong: https://www.nationalreview.com/news/journalist-sues-twitter-...
I think there's a difference between how we should recognise someone socially and the reality of an individual's biology. What's worrying here is that stating a biological fact can be viewed as too extreme if it goes against a certain political ideology.
But there are plenty of examples like this. I know people have been kick off of social media for suggesting the Prophet Muhammad was a pedophile, or for discussing racial crime stats. And many of the examples I've seen of this don't appear to be in bad faith either, in fact most seem to be in the interest of honest dialogue. They just had the wrong opinions.
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
>On the other hand, a privately owned shopping mall is legally a "public square" in a number of states Even then, it does not mean that those malls should allow anyone to sell wares. What it means it allows people to visit without discrimination on basis of legally protected classes like gender and race. YouTube banning a channel does not ban individual from watching videos, it prevents them from uploading videos whi…
> What it means it allows people to visit without discrimination on basis of legally protected classes like gender and race No, the "public square" designation specifically allows people to do things like come to the mall and set up political protests and whatnot. It's not about _access_ to the mall; it's about speech protections. Is uploading videos more akin to setting up a store at the mall, or more akin to standi…
One flaw in the analogy is that physical space is limited and difficult for a person to move around in. The digital space is effectively infinite, and switching is as easy as typing in a new url (compared to the physical challenge of moving to another state/region).
Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views
#430Earlier quoted context omitted.
"White supremacy" wasn't involved in either WW1 or WW2. And "a white nationalist uprising in Europe" is a contradiction in terms, since Europeans do not in any way identify with a "white nation" of any sort. This whole "rah rah whites " stuff is something that people in the U.S. came up with during the Progressive Era, as a supposedly-'unifying' alternative to national/ethnic identities , some of which were quite ope…
I’m not sure why this is being down voted, 'white' is very much an American concept. British people are not French people are not Hungarians are not Greeks are not Italians are not Spanish people. We're Europeans, but we have very distinct and different cultures and we don't regard ourselves as 'whites' - it's rare (outside radical left circles) for Europeans to speak that way. The native people of most Mediterranean…
The "white people" concept is increasingly gaining popularity in Europe and especially among the European far-right though. This is due to the massive influx of non-European migrants over the past decades, which makes the racial divisions much more visible.