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

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#821

Post by stillbourne » Mon, May 04, 2020, 2:23 PM 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…

> That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment

There is no right conferred by the constitution that guarantees you a public platform in a private forum, it is simply an exemption from persecution by the government for statements made on any platform. That does not mean that the private owner of a forum must provide a platform of statements it does not endorse or condone for content that would be contrary to the forum owner or administrator's intended audience. That would be like forcing a restaurant that has been vandalized with graffiti from washing the exterior because the vandal has the right to have his work displayed regardless of the content, audience, or message.

> COVID-19 has added the additional element of this new concept of "disinformation".

This is not in any way a new concept. Furthermore this kind of disinformation can destroy the lives on innocent bystanders. Don't believe me? Ask all the people that have been effected by Sandy Hook truthers, Pizza Gate, and if you want to go back to the 80s, the daycare satanic moral panics.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#822

Post by benbristow » Mon, May 04, 2020, 2:25 PM UTC

deminature wrote: post #515

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…

Deplatforming has proven highly effective at preventing bad actors from continuing to spread misinformation on Reddit and other social media sites [1]. I support free speech in principle, but internet platforms are such a powerful megaphone for spreading misinformation, the likes of which history has never seen, that platform owners may feel ethically obligated to act against those who would misuse their systems to c…

Not defending him, nor do I believe him, but I watched a brief portion of the London Real livestream interview last night and he said that 5G provokes symptoms similar to that of COVID-19, not that 5G spreads Coronavirus.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#823

Post by benbristow » Mon, May 04, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #663

PureParadigm wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, as the parent mentions, YouTube can do the same kind of content curation from a legal point of view. The question is whether YouTube is a platform where we should advocate for less censorship/more freedom. I think that since YouTube is a general platform and that no serious alternatives exist, we should advocate for less censorship. YouTube is different from Hacker News because YouTube is more of a general platf…

> As far as I know, YouTube is the only serious option at the moment for general video content. Are they? There's Vimeo, Facebook, Pornhub's SFW option, Twitter can host short videos, there's a metric shitload of porn hosts, and if you're in for premium service every major CDN offers video hosting/distribution.

David Icke seems to have moved to BitChute

https://www.bitchute.com/channel/weBLW8e6mgIB/

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#824

Post by miscPerson » Mon, May 04, 2020, 2:48 PM UTC

cycomanic wrote: post #650

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We do not have the time, through our own actions or not, for quiet contemplation and retrospection into deep topics. This is a problem, but how does censorship solve it? You would in fact need to solve that problem for all ideas in order to correctly know what to censor, which nobody has time to do, hence the problem. > We have polarized ourselves into camps of right and wrong. This is exactly what the censorship m…

> And the other is trusted thought leaders who consult a variety of domain experts on a given topic to determine the consensus of the experts and relay it to all of the people who don't have time to look at the specific details on that specific topic. This is what has completely imploded. The news media has lost their credibility by explicitly abandoning even the pretense of impartiality and chasing clickbait nonsens…

Your comment comes across as partisan, rather than factual.

As an example, major news networks blatantly lied about the Covington kid because it fit their ideology.

Major news networks are untrustworthy, you just happen to support the narrative some of them are selling.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#825

Post by x86_64Ubuntu » Mon, May 04, 2020, 2:57 PM UTC

FranzFerdiNaN wrote: post #593

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…

The idea that you can convert people who hold racist, misogynistic, anti-Semitic or other repulsive thought by just presenting them better facts is of course naive. We have the entirety of human history that shows that the liberal idea of a market place of ideas is ridiculous. It doesn’t work, if only because for example the far right isn’t playing the same game and isn’t interested in fair debate.

No one thinks that. They just present that argument as a way to head-off such ideas from being marginalized and ostracized.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#826

Post by funny948 » Mon, May 04, 2020, 3:02 PM UTC

waynenilsen wrote: post #773

funny948 wrote: post #768

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our society is based on science. I would prefer to add an amendment to allow to censor extreme views contradicting modern science knowledge. It is, indirect, what happens and to be honest, i do believe that people doing the youtube videos about aliens and flatearth have often enough some agenda. It hurts our society and we need to find a proper solution.

This is a very dangerous viewpoint in my opinion. There is no true science without free speech. Kepler for example was censored due to his highly controversial views about the sun being at the center of the solar system. If the science is so shaky as to be blown over by some crackpots then it is no science good at all. Interestingly, some among the flat earthers have independently verified the curvature of the earth.…

I'm not talking about 'science' which is sho shaky as to be blown over by some crackpots.

The science for 'we are not on a flat earth' is here. We still have YouTube Channels saying otherwise without being able to prove it at all. And they do create issues in our society.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#827

Post by radford-neal » Mon, May 04, 2020, 3:03 PM UTC

DaedalusPsyk_ wrote: post #732

dntbnmpls wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The idea that you can convert people who hold racist, misogynistic, anti-Semitic or other repulsive thought by just presenting them better facts is of course naive. What? We have countless examples of it. What world are you living in? It's free speech, facts, ideas that change individuals and society. > We have the entirety of human history that shows that the liberal idea of a market place of ideas is ridiculous.…

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but the best protection is not free speech and studies have shown cognitive bias enables people to effectively ignore what disrupts their beliefs. http://ubplj.org/index.php/jpm/article/view/974 In fact we've known this for some time https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fh0082790 And very likely you yourself are also affected, in this case by your very belief in free speech.…

The fatal flaw in your argument is that "cognitive bias enables people to effectively ignore what disrupts their beliefs" applies to the people with the power to censor as well.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#828

Post by Andrex » Mon, May 04, 2020, 3:07 PM UTC

danieltillett wrote: post #700

Andrex wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube contributed 10% to Google's revenue last year ($15 billion.) https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/3/21121207/youtube-google-al... YouTube has been break-even since 2014-2015[1]. The myth that YouTube is still somehow unprofitable needs to die. 1. https://www.wsj.com/articles/viewers-dont-add-up-to-profit-f...

Yes YouTube may well be profitable as it is run now, but it may not be profitable if it was run as a utility.

It shouldn't be run as a utility then. The web is open; another video site can be established by anyone. YouTube proves the model can be profitable.

I'm not sure I'd treat YouTube's "monopoly" on internet video the same way as actual utilities have physical monopolies on their industries.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#829

Post by quickthrowman » Mon, May 04, 2020, 3:12 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #724

me_again wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't spreading dangerously false information about a viral pandemic similar to shouting "fire" in a theatre? I'm not sure it's always so easy to distinguish that actively dangerous conduct from fake news. Not that this difficulty means we shouldn't try.

OK, so I admit that Icke's thing about 5G and COVID-19 is batshit insane. I truly can't imagine how someone could argue that in good faith. He must be trolling, doing it for the lulz. But still, that's arguably distinguishable from creating a panic by shouting "fire" in a crowded theater that's undoubtedly not burning. In that crowded theater, it's the stampede that gets people killed in the moment. I do see the anal…

There are people attacking cell phone towers and threatening workers who work on them. It’s directly connected to the 5G coronavirus garbage.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#830

Post by CM30 » Mon, May 04, 2020, 3:17 PM UTC

no_wizard wrote: post #183

ravenstine wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private institutions should be bound by the first amendment once they've reached a critical mass. The reason I say this is that, if a small number of entities control the flow of information, and they get away with picking and choosing who has the opportunity to be heard, then the first amendment is effectively made meaningless. I want to be able to choose what comments to allow on my block and, at the same time, I w…

How do you, though, actually decide in a reasonable and objective fashion who’s big enough to warrant being held to a different standard than others? How do you really quantify that in a way that is objective and obvious Look at the rise of tiktok. On one hand at least where I live they had almost no mindshare but in the past 2 months now they do, and they’re growing in user count. Should they meet the same threshold…

How about this?

Work out the audience share of a service, then work out the audience share of its nearest competitor/competitors. If the former is twice/four times/whatever as high as the latter, then it's counted as a de facto monopoly and regulated.

So YouTube's got 74.08% of the market and Vimeo has 18.02%[1], and the former is definitely twice or four times more than the latter, so regulate the former.

[1]https://www.datanyze.com/market-share/online-video--12/youtu...