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

YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 449 posts

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#321

Post by root_axis »

enterx wrote: post #306
rv-de wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think every platform has the right to censor and also the duty to do so. Like gore or cp etc. This shapes a profile for a platform. In vimeo's case they distanced themselves from some conspiracy theory fanatics which is fine with me. Meaning I endorse that profile as a visitor and who doesn't just needs another platform. And one reason why those outlets (like Alex Jones & Co.) often aren't accepted around for long…

does church in your opinion has the right to ban certain types of books too? regardless of answer, please elaborate. do you see the slipperness of that slope?

Churches aren't businesses, they have different legal rights. Still, if you walk into a Baptist Christian church reciting versues from the Quran you will find yourself quickly banned and the church is within its rights to do so, even if muslims wouldn't like that. Fortunately, a mosque has the same freedom.

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#322

Post by root_axis »

hobs wrote: post #12
xwdv wrote: post #10

Has everyone forgotten that you can easily just host your own website and throw up whatever video content you want there? I can’t imagine creating a ton of educational content and then having it all depend on the whims of a single platform. This is not the end of infosec or hacking videos.

Its much much much more expensive to host video content than anything else.

All the more reason why you should not expect that a for-profit business will host your content for free without pre-conditions.

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#323

Post by dalbasal »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #320
dalbasal wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube, for example, got online video bigger/better/faster by doing centralisation, flash & such. ..FB also, photos of their grand hildren was the reason a lot of people got online.

But YouTube having faster servers isn't an "open web" roadblock, Facebook's social graph isn't either -- neither of these shed any light on your previous comment for me.

What would?

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#324

Post by ohithereyou »

torified wrote: post #165

The internet promised so much, but is being ruined by corporations and governments. I can't help but feel the ruining is accelerating. I hope the infosec community can come up with some kind of decentralized way to actually share free speech. If anyone is capable, they are. The discovery problem is an illusion. If you build it, they will come.

Opening up the Internet to commerce was our Original Sin.

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#325

Post by mikeash »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #294

first they came for the fake news, and I said nothing because I didn't care about the fake news' rights then they came for the altright, and I did say nothing because I didn't like the alt right content then they came for the historical channels for they talked about the rise of fascisms and I did say nothing because I was thinking of the easily influenced children then they came for the technical content, and there…

Nah, first they came for the pornography.

Bans on adult content are almost universal on mainstream services. Somehow this is never considered censorship by the tech community. It’s only when they start to ban other content that anyone cares.

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#326

Post by mooselumps »

beaconstudios wrote: post #288
scoutt wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be so pessimistic. There are still plenty of resources and places to discuss whatever you want. Youtube is like that big commercial avenue in the city, where you can only see mainstream stuff. If you look for the bookstore that has hacking/engineering/pyscology books, you'll have to go elsewhere. But it has always been this way.

there's plenty of niche content that finds its home on YouTube. It's as if the commercial avenue was infinitely large and could contain every shop you could wish for.

You have to leave the avenue for porn.

Pornhub has good enough porn, can find something for most any niche.

Soon you’ll find though, if you’re really into this or that, individual studios that cater to your niche create videos with high production value that are all around better than what you dig up on pornhub.

There are marketplaces for small studios like clips4sale.com (nsfw).

Also aggregators for specific niches / topics, etc.

Maybe anti-YouTube people can look to porn for the way out?

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#328

Post by PavlovsCat »

mr__y wrote: post #275
Lucadg wrote: post #82

On the other hand everytime YT removes something interesting it makes it easier for open alternatives to grow.

Yes and no. While it solves users/audience problem for alternative platformm, there is another barier of entry: bandwidth costs. I recommend anyone to do a simple math excercise of simple multiplication: size of 20 minute 2K video * 50'000 views * price per GB of traffic on your favourite cloud/hosting platform. To make the excercise more interesting now multiply whatever result you got by the number of videos your p…

You can monetize from the start, and get the full cut. If the monetization doesn't work out, you can pull the plug before the costs occur. You could probably even code it so that you never serve more than you made in income. You might also say you don't get to 50k views by multiplication, but by addition. I mean, if your videos are so popular that you get 50k hits in the first minute of uploading one, your audience will between them find a way to finance you.

> To make the excercise more interesting now multiply whatever result you got by the number of videos your platform is supposed to host.

Multiply income by the same amount though.

> Also assume that some users will want 4K.

I wouldn't assume that for all types of content anyway, and certainly not for all connections. In this case, that some users don't get what they want doesn't matter to those who don't want it. Whereas YT censoring things can turn off even people who aren't interested in the censored content per se, on principle, I doubt you'll find that with "not supporting 4k, because you only got started self-hosting and making ends meet". People sometimes are supportive of people in ways they aren't of companies.

Post reply on HN