At this point, it’s time to finally quit YT.
YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
351–360 of 449 posts
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#352YouTube needs to accelerate their banning process so they can become solely focused on mainstream psychological brainwashing clickbait. This way my favorite creators can actually move to other freer platforms and get paid without fascist payment processors and trying to abide by YouTube's insane terms and conditions. YouTube is going the way of cable TV channels dedicated to infomercials. The interesting stuff will be purged soon. The writing is on the wall. Backup and escape while you can. It will not get better.
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#353The problem here is that "hacking techniques" to a black hat are also, equal-and-oppositely, legitimate security research and prevention -- to a white hat / security researcher / ethical hacker...
In other words, they're aspects of the same thing...
The idea that you're going to ban something because one aspect of it has a negative social purpose is philosophically unsound... We don't ban videos on electricity or electrical engineering because people can be electrocuted... We don't ban videos on chainsaws because they could be used to cut a person in half... We don't ban videos on cars because they could be used to run people over... Everything in the universe can be used for a positive or negative purpose, when you start banning things because some people use these things for negative purposes, you misunderstand that those effects are caused by the actor, not the information and/or the tool that's being used...
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#354The 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.
Well, the internet is still there. It's just that the majority mistook private spaces for public ones. Well, it is convenient I guess. Your content is being found, the interface is great, someone else is paying for servers, storage and bandwidth. All of that for a little control and advertisements... And honestly, I want platforms to regulate content. They have millions of users, some of them are underage or even dem…
"Well, the internet is still there. It's just that the majority mistook private spaces for public ones."
Exactly. Using Twitter or Facebook in place of Email/IRC/Usenet/WWW is wrong so many ways, but good luck telling that around without getting laughed at.
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obviously the spirit of the law is for youtube to have a way to remove "how 2 script kiddie" videos. But the letter of the law matters, and right now the letters say they can ban just about any video discussing the details of vulnerable systems.
That is true, but youtube is full of things which basically violate these principals. I will pick the second item "Extremely dangerous challenges" because its nice and safe/generic to talk about. I think everyone understands what they are talking about, but youtube has tons of instructional videos for doing things which could severely maim/kill careless or poorly trained individuals. The infamous Shanghi tower climb/…
> "Extremely dangerous challenges"
I think you're misinterpreting this part of the ToS. I don't think it's meant to apply to videos of dangerous conduct in general. Instead, it's meant to apply to videos which are explicitly presented as a "challenge" for other users to complete -- along the lines of the ALS "Ice Bucket Challenge", but explicitly harmful (think "Drink a Gallon of Bleach Challenge").
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#356YouTube should just ban EVERYTHING, I mean, absolutely every video -- except for highly edited, highly censored, Barney The Purple Dinosaur(tm) children's videos, where the political party that is in power in the region of the world where the video is shown -- gets to do ALL of the editing...
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm happy for you that you speak a language google happens to have support in, and that you have the time to besides creating and uploading content, to monitor it is not censored at a later, random, date by google. And that you were able to provide the US based documentation they required and that your videos content happened to not be in the blacklist of any nation state. /s (I guess)
YouTube is a private company. They are under no obligation to provide support in 5,000 different languages. Or to host your videos at all. This post reeks of entitlement.
They control the pathways of modern speech. It's not like a baker where you can just get your wedding cake somewhere else. If Google doesn't like you they can damn near erase you from public view. If you have an internet business they can ruin it. There is no way to escape their influence.
Because of this, they have a responsibility to uphold people's natural right to expression. In many ways Google now has more control over speech than governments historically have.
If there was a viable competitor this would be different, but there is no such competitor.
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm happy for you that you speak a language google happens to have support in, and that you have the time to besides creating and uploading content, to monitor it is not censored at a later, random, date by google. And that you were able to provide the US based documentation they required and that your videos content happened to not be in the blacklist of any nation state. /s (I guess)
YouTube is a private company. They are under no obligation to provide support in 5,000 different languages. Or to host your videos at all. This post reeks of entitlement.
This poster is a customer and has every right to complain about a service.
The fact that you think they are entitled tells me you view the services as a gift and they should be grateful for whatever they get. The services provided are not gifts.
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube is a private company. They are under no obligation to provide support in 5,000 different languages. Or to host your videos at all. This post reeks of entitlement.
They control the pathways of modern speech. It's not like a baker where you can just get your wedding cake somewhere else. If Google doesn't like you they can damn near erase you from public view. If you have an internet business they can ruin it. There is no way to escape their influence. Because of this, they have a responsibility to uphold people's natural right to expression. In many ways Google now has more cont…
>They control the pathways of modern speech.
Not true. Almost all modern speech doesn't take place on Youtube or any Google platform. It's possible to broadcast without Google, publish without Google, disseminate without Google, gather without Google, dissent without Google, make phone calls without Google, chat, email, text, audio, video, everything - literally all forms of speech and expression are possible without Google, both on and off the internet.
>If Google doesn't like you they can damn near erase you from public view.
Also not true. Plenty of people Google "doesn't like" are still in public view. Name one person Google has effectively "disappeared" in this way, and I'll bet they still have a presence elsewhere on the web, still participate in society, still can communicate publicly, be contacted, etc.
>If you have an internet business they can ruin it.
Maybe. But then so could Amazon. So could your ISP. If losing SEO would ruin your business, the problem isn't Google's power, it's your crappy business model.
>There is no way to escape their influence.
Really? Do they control you here? In your home? Do they moderate other sites? Do they control Twitter, Facebook, Hacker News?
It's arbitrarily easy to escape their influence. They control one platform, not the internet, not society, not governments.
>In many ways Google now has more control over speech than governments historically have.
Governments can imprison you, torture you, kill you, run over your friends with tanks, nuke entire cities, fill shallow graves with dissidents, burn down libraries and make it legal. Google has no more control over speech than the governments whose laws they must obey by definition. They don't claim a monopoly on violence or sovereign immunity.
>If there was a viable competitor this would be different, but there is no such competitor.
There are plenty. Google is not the only search engine, and Youtube is not the only video streaming service.
Almost every part of your comment is falsehood, hyperbole and nonsense.
Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is nothing to come up with. Serving video is a well understood process, both as a service and self-hosted. YouTube's popularity is based mostly on network effect and Google footing the bill for a top notch experience for your viewers. Few people will pay the Vimeo prices, or build something at multiple the cost, if they can get the whole package for free. Disclaimer: I'm a Googler, so can't help you with estima…
What about PeerTube? Seems like a good fit for the infosec community.
That's entirely reasonable. My plan of record in for YouTube no longer footing the bill of disseminating videos of my children to extended family is similar (seeding them on bit torrent).
Edit: note that peer to peer doesn't exactly solve the economies. Instead of advertisers, you're asking your viewers to provide the resources. Depending on the audience, this will or will not work.