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

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#571

Post by hysan » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:23 AM UTC

occamrazor wrote: post #540

chrononaut wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am unsure of your argument. Are you saying that the size of the company factors into what policies it can enforce? i.e., smaller companies can have more freedom in policing content, but if an undefined critical mass is reached (perhaps market share), they should have less flexibility on curated content? Or is it a factor of what it's trying to build? e.g., if YouTube only focused on hosting political content, shoul…

GP argument is similar to the common carrier argument. Some communication channels (e.g. post, telephone, and maybe YouTube) are so pervasive, important, without comparable alternatives, that they should be considered as common goods and regulated as public services, rather than private companies. In particular freedom of speech applies to their users.

I would be for the common carrier argument if the logical extension that YouTube also gains the protections afforded to common carriers. No more having big companies get special treatment in abusing the Content ID system.

As much as I dislike YouTube’s policies in general, I find it difficult to argue against their current actions simply because powerful entities are already abusing the system behind the scenes to moderate content themselves.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#572

Post by Gatsky » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:24 AM UTC

syrrim wrote: post #518

Gatsky wrote: post #99

I don’t understand the free speech arguments here. Youtube is an advertising platform. They can do what they want with their platform. If I own a billboard, and someone wants to advertise their bags for dead kittens, I can say no. There needs to be some sense of proportionality. If the government bashed down Icke’s door and smashed his computer then sure, we should worry about free speech. But getting banned from You…

>I don’t understand the free speech arguments here. It's pretty simple. Many people rely on youtube's platform to reach viewers. This is the case for youtube recommendations, but also for subscriptions. When youtube bans someone, that person will reach a vastly smaller audience, in effect censoring them. Questions? >I can say no. That is a free speech issue as well. We might decide that you chose correctly, usually o…

Thanks for the response, I do have some questions.

How do you decide what constitutes 'many' people? Is vimeo deserving of similar scrutiny or doesn't it reach enough people? What about the video site someone started yesterday that has 2 people on it? What about when Youtube decides not to upload a video because it is in the wrong format? Should we force Youtube to host every video anyone decides to upload?

Why does Pornhub not allow David Icke conspiracy videos? Hypothetically speaking, if David Icke uploaded his entire canon to Pornhub, and Pornhub took it down, is that a violation of free speech?

What about letters to the editor in a newspaper, are they 'censoring' all the letters they don't publish, or should they start publishing issues that are 300 pages long and cost $10 to include all the letters?

Is it really true that I can be obligated to accept an advertisement regardless of the content? How do the free speech Gods 'know' why I didn't accept the advertisement? Perhaps I just don't want to bother dealing with the complaining phone calls, or I am worried about jeopardising future business from pet shops. All these personal freedoms are obliterated in the service of free speech?

As I said, I really don't understand the free speech arguments here.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#573

Post by PureParadigm » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:24 AM UTC

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #531

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The biggest issue is that the open debate is vulnerable to astroturfing with corporate influence and financial backing, which can completely drown out others and turn public opinion, through sheer exposure. Meh. Money buys speech has been a thing since day zero. If anything the internet has made this problem smaller because you don't have to buy a TV station to publish video anymore. Then the corporate propaganda i…

The "marketplace of ideas" clearly doesn't work for the betterment of mankind and the world. Corporate interests throw vast amounts of money into astroturf campaigns, creating propaganda and misinformation, in order to discredit their opponents, who do not have the same access to funds and influence. Google, FB et.al. are part of the problem, with their deep influences in politics. They ban the token nutjob like Icke…

It's incredibly unlikely you'll agree with the powers that be on every issue, so you'll find yourself deplatformed, and unable to speak out against injustice. As you mentioned, you feel that the powers that be are suppressing certain ideas. If you want censorship, guess who will be in charge of deciding what to censor.

Sure, astroturfing and other misinformation campaigns can happen if speech is truly free, but the alternative is far worse. With free speech, if your ideas have merit then at least there is a chance they will be recognized and your audience can grow. With complete censorship, you have no chance at all. Free speech is the least bad of these two options.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#574

Post by tomhoward » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:25 AM UTC

james-mcelwain wrote: post #539

tomhoward wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> particularly rigorous historiography It was one-line discussion-board summation of what is widely accepted by historians (as you said, "trivially true"), but if you'd like to share an explanation of how the spread of ideas leading to the revolutions of Europe could have happened without an innovation that had the same effect as the printing press did, I'd be intrigued to to read it. > patently absurd So far, three…

> If you'd like to share an explanation of how the spread of ideas leading to the revolutions of Europe could have happened without an innovation that had the same effect as the printing press ded, I'd be genuinely intrigued to to read it. History is more complicated than a single invention! It's needlessly reductive. I could also say: "how could have the revolutions of Europe happened without mercantile capitalism c…

> History is more complicated than a single invention

Yes, of course, I never claimed otherwise. But some concepts are more fundamental and influential than others, and the flow of information is more fundamental and influential than most.

> My sole reason for participating in this thread is to firmly reject idealism and the teleological view of history. Ideas aren't magic. Technology isn't either.

If that's all you're trying to say, then, OK, thanks for pointing that out.

> it's kind of hilarious that you're invoking HN rules regarding my speech in the same breath as you are defending the merits of free speech

Fine, have your free point :)

But dismissing everyone else's comments as "absurd", "preposterous", "hilarious" etc whilst not making any effort to construct a solid assertion about the main topic is just a waste of everyone's time.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#575

Post by Digit-Al » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:28 AM UTC

parsimo2010 wrote: post #480

chrononaut wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hacker News Guidelines > What to Submit > Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. > In Comments > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion…

My actual answer is in the last line, but I'll ramble a bit first. You make an interesting point, but I think there are times in which we can prohibit certain types of posts and comments that might technically be censorship (using the definition of suppression or prohibition of things that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security), but they aren't bad censorship. I would place some so…

My answer to that would be that YouTube did not de-platform David Icke because of his wacky views, remember he has had an account for ages with no problem. They de-platformed him because he was spreading dangerous misinformation that could endanger lives. For example, the 5G misinformation has led to 5G masts being set on fire and 5G engineers being threatened and (I think) assaulted. Now you can say what you want about free speech, and I largely agree with you, but if someone is spreading dangerous misinformation that is causing people to commit arson and assault then I think that silencing them is a reasonable option.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#576

Post by watwut » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:28 AM UTC

stateofnounion wrote: post #568

joshuamorton wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Global air travel does not need to be stopped. This isn't what the WHO said. They said bans on air from specific places (especially those that disrupt supply chains) are bad. This is true. Banning all air travel to/from china would have hurt medical supply chains in the US, with very little benefit. > 2. There is no evidence of human-to-human transmission. When this claim was made (in early january), there was not…

There are large swathes of the population that have been infected asymptomatically: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyregion/coronavirus-anti... There are similar studies and similar findings in both the US and Europe. tl;dr The virus is much less lethal for the average person than models predicted before we had more data.

CFR is case fatality ration and is literally defined as "people who we know are sick to people who died". It does not mean overall lethality and it never meant that. CFR is not prediction nor model, it is input into the mode.

Asymptomatic non tested population is literally not supposed to be counted into CFR.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#577

Post by [deleted] » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:29 AM UTC

kyle_martin1 wrote: post #391

toofy wrote: post #221

This really comes down to whether or not all ideas should be _promoted_ equally. Do we think all ideas–even if they are demonstrably untrue-deserve to be boosted to the same level of provable truths. Should they all be promoted equally and considered equally and taught equally, forever? Do we allow demonstrably false claims to remain at the top to be treated equally, forever? To forever waste time? Every single prova…

I elect to demote your ideas. How does that feel?

[deleted]

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#578

Post by waterhouse » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:31 AM UTC

deadmutex wrote: post #471

ThomPete wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so what?

People actually believe it, and cause harm. Case in point: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/us/pizzagate-comet-ping-p...

So how many people have heard of Pizzagate, and how many of them ended up doing something deranged about it? (The article says no one was hurt, actually, but let's say someone was.) Meanwhile, how many people do deranged things because of beliefs that didn't come from the internet—say, they saw someone looking at them and just knew that person was evil, or they had some misfortune and blamed someone else and decided to get revenge?

I submit that the type of person who believes a wacko theory and kills someone because of it is likely mentally ill, and might well have killed someone because of some other belief; the primary cause is the mental illness, while the specific belief and where it came from is not worth dwelling on.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#579

Post by alasdair_ » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:31 AM UTC

JSavageOne wrote: post #514

chrononaut wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am unsure of your argument. Are you saying that the size of the company factors into what policies it can enforce? i.e., smaller companies can have more freedom in policing content, but if an undefined critical mass is reached (perhaps market share), they should have less flexibility on curated content? Or is it a factor of what it's trying to build? e.g., if YouTube only focused on hosting political content, shoul…

Yes the size most certainly matters, obviously Facebook should be held to a different standard than some niche social network for pet owners with 100 users. Monopolies should be held to a different standard. I'd argue that the nature of the business should factor into it as well. Since Youtube advertises and presents itself as a platform where any user can upload any kind of content excluding pornography and dark stu…

>Since Youtube advertises and presents itself as a platform where any user can upload any kind of content excluding pornography and dark stuff (eg. animal abuse), I don't think that censoring on the basis of political views alone is justified

YouTube is pretty clear about their stance on what is and is not allowed. They have made it very clear, in particular, that coronavirus misinformation is not allowed. I see little difference between choosing to censor pornography and choosing to censor coronavirus misinformation. Both are protected speech in the USA but they are both also things that are allowed (and is reasonable to) censor if the platform wishes.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#580

Post by t0ughcritic » Mon, May 04, 2020, 6:31 AM UTC

Been saying this a long time. The top tech companies aka FANGs are too big and just booting people off regardless of if they agree with msg is is not right. This was happening with apps before, now videos and WhatsApp msg throttling. Soon it will be email filtering and then we can say we officially have the great freedom firewall of America. Any means of discovery and communication digitally is now strictly controlled under the guise of fake news. Content was already being ghosted or shadow banned and now it is simply booted. No one should attempt to build any company unless they are heavily funded on these platforms. Add trailers, preview content on them and if possible self host.