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

YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 744 posts

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#691

Post by lugg »

weaksauce wrote: post #663
lugg wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a clarification combined with a change in behavior? Redefinition.

> What is a clarification combined with a change in behavior? It's moving from an ad hoc approach to a more definite, clarified criteria. Before some of these videos were being removed and some not but now there's more of a clear framework by which to judge offending content. you can squabble over definitions of words all you like but they've always been against hateful content. they are just clarifying what is hatef…

I'm not squabbling over definitions, you're saying they are clarifying.

I am saying they are clarifying what they mean by repeating them selves and changing the definition.

Has their TOS actually changed here? If so, in what way? Does it now include more specifics?

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#692

Post by leereeves »

lugg wrote: post #689
leereeves wrote: post #675

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They weren't protected classes when the political pressure would have been against them. "Protected class" basically means politically favored group, and as GP points out, that changes.

Yes it does, but to attempt and claim that White Supremacy could ever be considered a "protected class" is absurd. This isn't my bias speaking here, this is a contextual reality, the world has constraints and there isn't any iteration of what we have that would allow this reality to evolve. The only wiggle room you have here is on free speech grounds but we have already figured out, that this does not apply here.

There are many countries where various forms of supremacy are the equivalent of a protected class.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#693

Post by dang »

radiator wrote: post #251
nyczomg wrote: post #210

From the article: 'The new policy will ban “videos alleging that a group is superior in order to justify discrimination, segregation or exclusion,” the company said in a blog post.' Is this going to include videos that mention "white privilege" (which one could argue alleges superiority of white people) in which white people are asked to "check their privilege" in some way (which one could argue is an attempt to just…

No, because white privilege cannot be denied and exclusion against whites can never exist. But you should tread carefully, asking such questions.

Please do not take HN threads further into ideological flamewar.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#694

Post by dang »

vowelless wrote: post #91

Good. Online radicalism is a thing. To all the people here who are decrying this as “censorship”, remember that during the early 2010s, Islamic radicals were getting radicalized on YouTube by pretty benign sermons (Ex: Awlaki and his “tour of Paradise” lectures that inspired Boston 2013, fort hood and a bunch of other international attacks). YouTube removed all that out and I think Muslims getting radicalized on YouT…

"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."

What a wretched, demoralizing 118-comment subthread. A white supremacy vs. Islamic extremism cage match was the last thing we needed, and of course it hopped via WWII and Nazis to capitalism vs. communism—the mother of generic ideological flamewars, whither all return. None of this is good discussion for Hacker News; it's predictable, nasty, and the essence of what we're trying to avoid. To the extent it proliferates like this here, we might as well just shut the damn place down.

Everyone: please don't.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#695

Post by dang »

GrayTextIsTruth wrote: post #87

There are comments being removed from this thread even though they are not supremacist. People need to wake up to the control of big tech, big govt, etc.

Users flagged them, in most cases probably because they broke the site guidelines by being generic ideological flamewar.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#696

Post by dang »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #179
happytoexplain wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't that imply that the only reason comments might be removed from Hacker News is if they encourage violent, extremist political ideologies?

I'm surprised this post is even still up. HN usually removes anything remotely controversial. A couple weeks ago, they removed a NYT article solely because the article had "White Liberals" in the title.

> HN usually removes anything remotely controversial.

That's not close to true. How people arrive at these generalities is beyond me!

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#697

Post by Rebelgecko »

foldr wrote: post #339
Rebelgecko wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The war where a bunch of white and Asian people fought against a bunch of white and Asian people? The one where the Nazis said that the Japanese, Arabs, even Jews could be "honorary Aryans" when it was convenient for the cause?

So the Nazis weren't actually racists, got it. It's amazing how many people actually think this, and how discussions like this bring them out of the woodwork. A couple of years ago I got into a pointless discussion with someone on HN who went so far as to say that Hitler wasn't a racist. (No, really.) This is why white supremacy is dangerous. The history of WWII and the rise of the Nazis is rapidly being forgotten, a…

That certainly wasn't the impression that I meant to give with my comment. So I can write more clearly in the future, can you tell me what I said that made you think that I'm claiming Nazis aren't racist?

I just think it seems overly simplistic to the point of being almost nonsensical to say that WW2 was caused by white supremacism. White supremacism certainly didn't make Japan invade China. While I'm no expert, at the very least I can say that the Wikipedia article for "Causes of World War II" seems in agreement with what I said— while racism played a role, facism/militarism and plain old nationalist expansionism were much bigger factors.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#698

Post by UncleMeat »

core-questions wrote: post #527
dageshi wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see, would that include allowing pornography on youtube, or would that not be allowed, if not why not?

Interesting question. Of course, being of sound mind, I don't consider pornography to be the same thing as political speech, and don't really seem to have any issue drawing a line between the two. It should certainly be just as easy to NOT see either thing, if you don't want to; but presently it's much harder to get a platform for the speech than it is for the porn. Funny, that.

I find porn to be considerably less objectionable than holocaust denial.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#699

Post by vinceguidry »

vkou wrote: post #576
luckylion wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Half the bloody point of white supremacy is that the supremacist is the one who chooses who is white enough to be in the in-group, and who is not. Meh, removing any value from descriptive terms doesn't help. > The definition of white changes, based on who the supremacist wants to kill, displace, or enslave. Or it's just not white supremacy, which it never was with the Nazis.

And racism makes no sense, because we are all members of the human race. Therefore, I posit that American Slavery was not based on racism. Aren't pointless semantic games fun? Nazism was absolutely white supremacy. That it excluded ethnic groups that you consider to be white, or stack-ranked various white ethnic groups has nothing to do whether or not it was about white supremacy. Please, pray tell, what exact role w…

The distinction between racism and nationalism matters. You can ultimately never completely quell racism. Racists emerge out of the woodwork any time they think they can find solidarity. It's evil, and evil is fought through awareness.

Nationalism however is the fundamental basis behind modern sovereignty. It's an identity based on shared geography rather than appearances. Nationalism ultimately prevents the people in the nation from getting conquered by other nations. You don't want the sentiments running away on you, but a certain amount of national pride is good for a people.

Nazism hid racism behind nationalism, in order to meld the two political forces together to form a ruling coalition. This was fundamental to its success. You cannot merely say the Nazis were racist, to turn them into the bogeyman, without acknowledging that the rest of the world had a role to play in bringing them to power.

The West, collectively, brought about World War 2. We didn't listen to the lessons learned over a thousand years of grappling with warfare on the continent, we did not do what was needed at the end of World War 1. It was so obvious that Germany was going to rearm and try again that France immediately went to considerable expense to fortify their eastern border.

We left an enormous power vacuum in Germany in the name of greed. We would not make that same mistake again at the end of WW2, though honestly the spectre of nuclear war had a lot more to do with it than moral imperative.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#700

Post by anbop »

manfredo wrote: post #665
anbop wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your comment but find it rambling, so I’ll concur with this: If free speech is a right worth protecting from the government, it’s worth protecting against equally powerful corporations.

> If free speech is a right worth protecting from the government, it’s worth protecting against equally powerful corporations. But corporations' ability to decide what to host is guaranteed by freedom of speech . Remember, freedom of speech is not just freedom to say what you want it's also freedom from compelled speech. It's the freedom from the government telling you to make or host speech. Mandating that corporati…

That's under the principle that a corporation holds the same rights as a person, which is not a principle that everyone agrees with.
Post reply on HN