YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#151

Post by ryankemper » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:01 AM UTC

DonHopkins wrote: post #126

ryankemper wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some people, after being exposed to misinformation, chose to believe them. You missed my point :) Humans, being inherently limited, are always at risk of being wrong. Being wrong about things is the default state. I simply don't think that we should strive to expunge all forms of "misinformation". That is to say, of course people believe misinformation. > Do you have evidence that the truth more often than not win…

YouTube is perfectly capable of objectively and correctly deciding that David Icke is full of shit. And the Constitution decides that the truth is that the First Amendment doesn't apply to YouTube. That's an objective truth you seem to be unaware of.

I consider your statement to really be saying the following:

"According to myself, YouTube is perfectly capable of objectively and correctly deciding that David Icke is full of shit."

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#152

Post by gamblor956 » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:01 AM UTC

brenden2 wrote: post #52

rajup wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not censorship by any means; YouTube isn't the government. David Icke and his ilk should feel free to take their lunatic fringe theories to the lunatic fringe corners of the Internet like Breitbart etc. They won't be "censored" there.

YouTube is a de facto public utility at this point. IMO if they want it to be a closed ecosystem, they should not allow public access the way they currently do. There's no good alternative to YouTube (yet) but I hope there is some day. Pushing people to the fringes just breeds more hatred, outrage, misinformation, and extremists. Imagine if there was just one phone company and they only let people who they agree with…

YouTube is not a de facto public utility. It is not currently used as the primary means of news by any segment of the population, by any government entity anywhere in the world.

It is not a means of communication like Zoom or the telephone. It's just videos. Lots and lots of videos. It provides entertainment to billions of people, but that doesn't mean YouTube is a utility. It just means its very popular.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#153

Post by cameronbrown » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:01 AM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #83

brenden2 wrote: post #11

IMO censorship is wrong. To quote someone smarter than me: > I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/06/01/defend-say/

If you hold this absolutest view of free speech, does that mean you don't believe that fraud should be a crime? I am allowed to just blatantly lie about anything under the cover of free speech, right? What about libel or slander? Can I say that brenden2 is a murderer, and make a website with photoshopped pictures of you killing people? Free speech has limits, and telling blatant lies meant to mislead people is one of…

Uhhh... fraud has legal definition, as does libel - these are _civil_ issues not _criminal_. That being said, the right to actually say the words is still protected and nobody is allowed to take that right away.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#154

Post by DonHopkins » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:02 AM UTC

nightcracker wrote: post #108

cortesoft wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you hold this absolutest view of free speech, does that mean you don't believe that fraud should be a crime? I am allowed to just blatantly lie about anything under the cover of free speech, right? What about libel or slander? Can I say that brenden2 is a murderer, and make a website with photoshopped pictures of you killing people? Free speech has limits, and telling blatant lies meant to mislead people is one of…

If you follow your line of thought then David Icke should be prosecuted. And then YouTube is still wrong here, acting as a judge, jury and executioner vigilante.

No, they just decided, as a commercial entity not under the jurisdiction of the First Amendment, to stop cutting him checks. Get a grip, they're not executing him.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#155

Post by zozbot234 » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:02 AM UTC

not2b wrote: post #81

all2 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has worked well in every fascist/despotic state that has implemented it. Free speech, even outright lies, racism, etc. must necessarily exist in the public forum if a society is to remain free. For now, the silencing is "friendly" in that it only destroys livelihoods. If we allow it to become a norm then how long will it take a populous - now so used to being silenced - to agree to let the government silence the "…

The Weimar Republic was a free society. How'd that work out? It was destroyed by outright lies, racism, etc.

Far from it. It's well known that the Nazis exploited Weimar-era censorship laws to their own ends after seizing power.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#156

Post by lovehashbrowns » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:02 AM UTC

Zenst wrote: post #96

lovehashbrowns wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem solved! Yay another person that thinks if something doesn't fix the issue 100% then it can't be considered. This is taking away their access to a platform that has global reach. They already had platforms where they didn't engage in debate, btw; they're called youtube channels with heavily-moderated chat sections. Except there they can reach millions of people.

It would of been better to leave it there, but had a disclaimer warning that couldn't be skipped akin to the old piracy warnings on purchased movie DVD's. You also won't stop such types of content from appearing on said platforms, less popular but still they will appear, get popular and get closed down. But that's an issue with some types of content that all social media platforms have. No solution will be 100%, let'…

The key component is them having access to a platform with global reach. Exposing and debating hasn't been working all that well, has it? These 5G conspiracy theories are absurdly easy to bust. Yet here we are, with people attacking 5G towers and threatening employees. 9/11 conspiracy theories are still popular. Moon landing conspiracy theories. Debating in an of itself doesn't work. Humans aren't perfectly logical.

ugh there are literally people who think the Earth is flat. There are literally people who think the Earth is flat!

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#157

Post by stri8ed » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:02 AM UTC

DonHopkins wrote: post #126

ryankemper wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some people, after being exposed to misinformation, chose to believe them. You missed my point :) Humans, being inherently limited, are always at risk of being wrong. Being wrong about things is the default state. I simply don't think that we should strive to expunge all forms of "misinformation". That is to say, of course people believe misinformation. > Do you have evidence that the truth more often than not win…

YouTube is perfectly capable of objectively and correctly deciding that David Icke is full of shit. And the Constitution decides that the truth is that the First Amendment doesn't apply to YouTube. That's an objective truth you seem to be unaware of.

As with all such matters, its about the slippery slope, and setting precedents. The belief is, we can have our cake and eat it too. e.g. we will allow free speech, except for the egregious cases like X, Y, Z. The problem of course is, who defines egregious, and can it be objectively defined?

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#158

Post by kiba » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:02 AM UTC

ryankemper wrote: post #148

techsupporter wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I won't address that argument here but personally I think it's a very dangerous way of thinking The problem is you’ve just said you won’t address the primary, most compelling reason to take these actions. Assuming that “sunshine is the best disinfectant” presupposes a lot of things about society that are, in my observation, no longer true. We do not have the time, through our own actions or not, for quiet contempla…

Yes, by not addressing that I put myself in the trap where I was forced to respond to it anyway in a later comment. So, in order to avoid repeating myself, I believe I addressed that notion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23063309 In short, I am not saying that the truth will necessarily "win out" over the false. Rather I am saying - and this was my fault for not being clear enough - that I reject the noti…

OK. I guess we should let anti-vaxers spread disinformation causing a whole bunch of people dying unnecessarily because people believed it.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#159

Post by tootie » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:03 AM UTC

ryankemper wrote: post #46

I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I agree that they're not bound by the first amendment (I don't claim to understand the nuances of the "platform" laws so I won't address that), b…

I disagree. I think you have to accept the consequences of destructive behavior. If someone was talking like this at my office, I'd expect them to be fired. Same as if they were outwardly racist or sexist. It's detrimental to other people's well-being.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#160

Post by lurquer » Mon, May 04, 2020, 1:03 AM UTC

hyperbovine wrote: post #92

bcoates wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As everyone knows, nobody propagated strange conspiracy theories before the invention of YouTube and Twitter.

Perhaps you are genuinely not old enough to remember a time before YouTube and Twitter, but there were way fewer conspiracy theories floating around, and they didn't have nearly the social impact that they do today. A coordinated misinformation campaign could never have swayed elections in the US and UK before social media. Why? Because there were institutions in place that acted as a filter. Say what you will about…

David Icke rose to fame long before the Internet.

Mormons.

Scientologists.

The benefits of smoking tobacco. The danger of smoking marijuana. (And vice versa, depending on decade.)

The aberrancy/normalcy of homosexuality (take your pick... depends on the decade.)

The vast conspiracy theory that is the Red Mensce. The vast conspiracy that is evil capitalism. (Once again, depends on the decade and locale as to which disinformation campaign is at work.)

Etc.

All of these -- and dozens of others -- thrived pre-internet.

Youtube -- like newspapers before it -- is dying. The ability to host, index, and disseminate video content is spreading st breakneck speed. Youtube is at the point that magazines were several years ago: becoming more and more sanctimonious until it will awake to discover nobody is using their content.