Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

linkedin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 169 posts

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#101

Post by slumdev »

valeness wrote: post #85
slumdev wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're a trans or LGBTQ creator your content is not safe. There was a time when a man's bedroom activity didn't enter into his professional life. I know the idea is difficult for millennials.

This sounds like an incredibly bigoted, or at best ignorant, stance to take. I think it can be safe to assume that the GP meant that LGBTQ creators can be marginalized based on how they act, look, or simply identify. There is nothing about those 3 things that telegraphs "a man's bedroom activity".

> LGBTQ creators can be marginalized based on how they act, look, or simply identify. There is nothing about those 3 things that telegraphs "a man's bedroom activity".

When they "act, look, or simplify identify," in a way that easily identifies them as not cisgendered and/or not heterosexual, how are they not telegraphing information about their bedroom activities?

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#102

Post by reaperducer »

UncleMeat wrote: post #66
reaperducer wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every other generation: "A person who happens to be gay." Millennials: "A gay person." For some reason, a lot of younger people are hung up on defining themselves by their sexuality, rather than defining themselves by the kind of person they are or the things they have done.

Every other generation: a degenerate who deserves to be thrown in prison or die of aids. Let’s not pretend that the older generations have any moral high ground regarding non traditional sexualities.

No need to pretend. I hate to break it to you, but millennials weren't the first gay people. Gay people were accepted in society for a very long time before 2000. There wasn't suddenly some kind of awakening and the world changed.

Yes, there was persecution, just as there is today. But nothing near what Hollywood likes to make you young people believe in other to sell tickets and streams.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#103

Post by jasonlotito »

typenil wrote: post #58
jasonlotito wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

De-monitized just means advertisers don't want to advertise on those channels via YouTube. It doesn't mean the channel can't find other means of funding itself. It's not YouTube's responsibility to fund a channel regardless of feedback from its advertisers. Simply put, you can't expect free money.

> De-monitized just means advertisers don't want to advertise on those channels via YouTube It means YouTube believes that advertisers don't want to advertise, or that journalists are running hit pieces on the vertical. It may be correlated to advertiser demands, but the direct causation isn't there most of the time.

If advertisers want to be on that channel, they can still advertise on that channel. Stop spreading misinformation.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#104

Post by thekyle »

bbarn wrote: post #38
scrps wrote: post #23

Yet you can browse youtube and learn how to build an AR-15 lower reciever, learn tactical shooting, and knife fighting*... But for the love of all things lawful don't explain a buffer overflow or a side-channel attack. I am not suggesting those videos/channels be banned either just pointing the uneven absurdity of YT's policies.

Gun channels have almost all been demonetized. In fact, just about every vertical is "demonetized" in large portions of their content creators. It's almost like youtube is the only one profiting at scale, weird.

Are there not gun companies that would want to advertise on these gun channels? Seems like a lot of YouTube's problems would go away if they just allowed advertisers to choose which channels to show ads on.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#105

Post by p1necone »

Ruthalas wrote: post #84
myself248 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is great; is there any view towards rehosting this stuff on peertube or whatever? Or is it okay for now, to just know that it's sitting on someone's disk, as long as we know how to reach that someone if needed?

I've considered uploading to a peertube instance, but I ran into an issue where the instance seemed to have a policy prohibiting mirroring existing/live channels. For the moment I make my archive available via Soulseek, and am open to requests!

I'm not surprised that there are policies against people reuploading other peoples content.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#106

Post by [deleted] »

R0b0t1 wrote: post #97
_wldu wrote: post #83

Looking at the titles of some of the videos, it seemed to be more about how to pirate commercial software than security. I think YouTube probably did the right thing. https://codeofhacking.blogspot.com/2018/01/burp-suite-pro-v1...

YouTube is free to do what they want but sensible actions should be informed by the law. Currently, you can't be charged with anything for describing how to do something. It goes even further: you can sell a kit with instructions on how to make something illegal and this is perfectly fine.

[deleted]

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#107

Post by gamacodre »

syshum wrote: post #67
torben-friis wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had never heard of bitchute. Going in, the first recommended video is: "A Jew asks why do people deny The Holocaust?...and admits the 6 Million figure is fake" from the account "Holocaust Lies Explained". Soo... yeah. Par for the course for "uncensored alternative" sites I guess?

Yes uncensored sites will have distasteful, terrible, and repugnant content. That is a GOOD thing, and a FEATURE not a deterrent. You do not defeat bad ideas, and repugnant ideologies with suppression of speech. Sorry it does not work that way no matter how much the Authoritarian Left and the Authoritarian Right would love it to

You don't defeat bad ideas by promoting them either; you defeat them with shame, i.e. consequences for being willfully ignorant or acting like a jackass. But the internet rarely delivers meaningful feedback to the folks that craft this type of "distasteful, terrible, and repugnant content."

Now, you might be the sort of person that would choose to live with a group of sadistic trolls for the edification that might result. I suspect most humans would react badly to that type of environment; our psychology is not well adapted to a constant barrage of persuasive deception and emotional manipulation.

Personally, I hope this latest crop of trashtube sites is driven offline and into bankruptcy; the sooner, the better.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#108

Post by Mountain_Skies »

hmry wrote: post #71
AndrewUnmuted wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not a civilised way to conduct business. It's true, and the way they try to hide this fact is by pretending that the censorship and policy switch-up is done in the name of "anti-racism." YouTube & co could not have been more lucky that an entire segment of the culture came up with the perfect catch-all term to enable them to walk back their horrible business blunders.

They're taking down hacking videos in the name of anti-racism? I don't know about that...

YouTube doesn't have a defined policy because they say if they do, the racists will abide by it while finding ways to still be racist that don't violate the policy. By not having a defined policy, they can declare anything racist. It's not that they're declaring hacking videos to be racist, it's that they're using the perceived threat of racists using the letter of the law to continue to post racist content as a way of not needing to justify their deletion of anything on any topic without explanation. If racism didn't exist, YouTube would want to invent it to justify their policy of not having a defined content policy.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#109

Post by tracker1 »

djsumdog wrote: post #5

Looks like he started a channel on a Peertube server, but it has nothing on it yet. I hope he has a backup of all his videos. ALWAYS HAVE A LOCAL BACKUP of all the content you upload to other services. Facebook is not your photo backup. All your stuff could disappear off Google tomorrow. The cloud is literally someone else's computer. The biggest takeaway for all YouToobers is to organize all their videos in a manor…

Beyond that, would suggest Youtubers peer their content on a few of the upstarts. I've started using Bitchute and Odysee a bit more.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#110

Post by ddevault »

Ruthalas wrote: post #53
ve55 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would go even further: Always have a local backup of anything on the Internet that is important to you, whether you made it or not, unless you know there are many other accessible versions of it for redundancy. You never know when a large company will delete it without notice. (Is this feasible? Perhaps not, but given how cheap storage is, if this could be even semi-automated, it would easily save a lot of heartach…

If you archive youtube content, consider stopping by my discord server. https://discord.gg/EJvS4kf I maintain a list of content that various members have archived, such that if anything is removed, people can direct inquiries to people who have archived that content. It's a small way to keep track of what things have been successfully archived, and direct efforts toward at-risk channels. (You can see the current list…

Not very wise of you to depend on Discord and Google Sheets instead of more open alternatives when you're organizing a group whose purpose is to literally preserve the victims of corporate censorship.
Post reply on HN