Live data from Hacker News

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

boingboing.net

411–420 of 449 posts

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

#411
post #358
post #342

Earlier 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.

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.

YouTube's customers are advertizers, not viewers.

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

#412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"we"? In the UK you are not allowed to carry a knife with you, unless you just bought one and are bringing to home or are a certified chief who needs one for work, or are going camping.

Hmm, how is it actually regulated? So, e.g. if I am going to my friends and carrying a bottle of wine altogether with pocket knife bundled with a corkscrew to be sure I will be able to open it, then I am in a grey zone or even illegal?

As long as it's a small, non-locking pocket knife, you're fine. If it's larger, you're fine as long as you have a good reason (eg. needed for work).

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

#413
post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

YouTube's customers are advertizers, not viewers.

Yes, because the viewers are the product being sold to the advertisers. Content creators, meanwhile, are essentially independent contractors that get free video hosting and a little cut of the ad money (assuming they fulfill a lengthy checklist) in exchange for giving the platform any real reason to exist. You'll find that this is the exact angle that the folks at Google like to spread until the second one of their advertisers starts to hesitate.

So in essence, you have a bunch of kind-of employees complaining about their kind-of employer's insistence that the customer is always right, even if it undermines their livelihoods. That sounds like what you'd expect out of any other customer-facing job, so what's the problem here?

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

#414

The 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 ele…

Popular hacking-related YouTube channel LiveOverflow has a nice discussion of the ban that addresses this very concern at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIdZ2oPyB1Y

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

#415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not banning knives though, are we? Guns are different, and they're banned for the same reasons that, say, carrying around a bioweapon is banned. - Their primary purpose is to inflict harm. - The harm caused is potentially / easily lethal. - Their existence escalates nearly all situations. - They're dangerous items that can very easily cause accidental harm.

"we"? In the UK you are not allowed to carry a knife with you, unless you just bought one and are bringing to home or are a certified chief who needs one for work, or are going camping.

That's not actually true, the law states, "Without a reasonable excuse", so any reasonable excuse is fine. The idea you'd need to be "certified" to carry a knife is fiction to drive an agenda.

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

#416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not banning knives though, are we? Guns are different, and they're banned for the same reasons that, say, carrying around a bioweapon is banned. - Their primary purpose is to inflict harm. - The harm caused is potentially / easily lethal. - Their existence escalates nearly all situations. - They're dangerous items that can very easily cause accidental harm.

"we"? In the UK you are not allowed to carry a knife with you, unless you just bought one and are bringing to home or are a certified chief who needs one for work, or are going camping.

That's untrue.

If the blade is under 3 inches (and isn't lockable) you're allowed to carry it.

If the blade is longer than 3 inches you need a valid reason to carry it.

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

#417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"we"? In the UK you are not allowed to carry a knife with you, unless you just bought one and are bringing to home or are a certified chief who needs one for work, or are going camping.

Actually, in the UK you are not legally allowed to carry a hard fruit such as for example a squash or miniature pumpkin in a plastic carry bag if you end up using it for self defence when attacked. Yes, that's right, in UK carrying in public any object that can be or is used as a weapon (including defensively) is considered a crime. This is normally applied to knives, but if the letter of the law was to be adhered to…

No, this is untrue.

You're not allowed to carry a hard fruit in a bag with the intention of using it as a self defence weapon. But if you go shopping and happen to have it on you when you're attacked you're allowed to use it to defend yourself. (And you don't need to wait for the attacker to land the first blow, you're allowed the first strike if you're genuinely trying to defend yourself).

EDIT: also, you seem to misunderstand the purpose of English arrests. Of course if you stab an animal to death you're going to get arrested. The arrest allows the police to question you, and it _protects your rights_ -- you get a free lawyer for that interview; they have 24 hours to charge or release you etc.

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

#418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"we"? In the UK you are not allowed to carry a knife with you, unless you just bought one and are bringing to home or are a certified chief who needs one for work, or are going camping.

Hmm, how is it actually regulated? So, e.g. if I am going to my friends and carrying a bottle of wine altogether with pocket knife bundled with a corkscrew to be sure I will be able to open it, then I am in a grey zone or even illegal?

If the blade is under 3" and isn't a locking blade you don't need a reason. If the blade is longer than 3" you need a reason. "I'm taking this bottle of wine to my friend's house and they don't have a corkscrew" would be fine.

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

#419
post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"we"? In the UK you are not allowed to carry a knife with you, unless you just bought one and are bringing to home or are a certified chief who needs one for work, or are going camping.

That's untrue. If the blade is under 3 inches (and isn't lockable) you're allowed to carry it. If the blade is longer than 3 inches you need a valid reason to carry it.

It's not automatically legal to carry a blade under 3 inches,

(2)Subject to subsection (3) below, this section applies to any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed except a folding pocketknife.

(3)This section applies to a folding pocketknife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 3 inches.

The three inches is clarification around folded pocketknives, it's not blanket authorisation to carry knives less than that length.

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

#420
post #262

This is what happens when you have no real public space on the Internet. Corporations will hide under the guise of private property. We really need to redefine the public space on the Internet.

What do you suggest? If you intend on redefining it in a way that takes away property rights, then I won't support it and neither should you.

Why don't we assert the property rights of the individual by defining one's personal data to be their rightful intellectual property?
Post reply on HN