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

121–130 of 169 posts

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#121

Post by webmaven »

slumdev wrote: post #101
valeness wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> 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?

Because all they are really telegraphing is a preference for persons to collaborate with in said bedroom activities to be a specific gender, and even that is hardly certain.

In any case there is actually very little in the way of "bedroom activities" that is exclusive to particular gender combinations. Most people are physically capable of performing most acts unassisted with most other people.

And quite a few of the acts that are excluded can be accomplished with an appropriate adapter.

All of which says almost nothing about anyone's odds of doing any particular thing with anyone else.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#122

Post by TACIXAT »

racl101 wrote: post #74
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…

I find it so goofy that people never bother to save a local backup of work they spent hours and hours curating. Have they never ever written an essay on Microsoft Word and then lost the progress cause they never saved it on a floppy?

Videos are big. I have a YouTube channel and don't back my videos up. Quite the opposite, I regularly delete them to free up harddisk space. I do cross post them to lbry.tv though which I've found a lot better than peertube.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#123

Post by tootie »

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.

Piracy is illegal.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#124

Post by unixhero »

tootie wrote: post #123
R0b0t1 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Piracy is illegal.

A victimless crime.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#125

Post by ramraj07 »

Causality1 wrote: post #75
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…

Seconded. My go-to for site archival is HTTRACK but there may be more modern tools that handle active content better.

Does this work on all the dumb SPAs of today?

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#126

Post by ddevault »

akerl_ wrote: post #117
ddevault wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proprietary software is inherently unethical, so I support anyone teaching people how to pirate it. YouTube did the predictable thing, but not the right thing.

At what point in the process of making software does proprietary software become unethical? If I open a restaurant and sell food, but don’t publish my recipes, that isn’t unethical? If I make software, and I choose to offer it for money but not offer the source, what is unethical about my behavior?

>At what point in the process of making software does proprietary software become unethical?

The start.

>If I open a restaurant and sell food, but don’t publish my recipes, that isn’t unethical?

No - this is also unethical.

>If I make software, and I choose to offer it for money but not offer the source, what is unethical about my behavior?

If software runs on the user's hardware or uses the user's data, I have a right to know how it works, to modify it to do something different, and to share those modifications with others. I hold the copyright to those modifications, and I should even be able to sell it to others. The software is just information at that point, and information is inherently valueless - it's the creation and distribution of information that costs money. And money itself, remember, is an abstraction for value, not valuable in and of itself. Just because something is a viable business model does not make it ethically agreeable.

Note for recipes that restaurants are required to share some information, like ingredient lists and nutritional content. This doesn't go far enough, but even at this level of transparency, the food industry is held more accountable than software.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#127

Post by akerl_ »

ddevault wrote: post #126
akerl_ wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At what point in the process of making software does proprietary software become unethical? If I open a restaurant and sell food, but don’t publish my recipes, that isn’t unethical? If I make software, and I choose to offer it for money but not offer the source, what is unethical about my behavior?

>At what point in the process of making software does proprietary software become unethical? The start. >If I open a restaurant and sell food, but don’t publish my recipes, that isn’t unethical? No - this is also unethical. >If I make software, and I choose to offer it for money but not offer the source, what is unethical about my behavior? If software runs on the user's hardware or uses the user's data, I have a rig…

I think it’s clear that we have fundamentally differing opinions on what constitutes “ethics”.

If I make something, it’s perfectly ethical for me to decide my criteria for giving it to somebody else. If the cost I impose or the restrictions I require are too onerous, nobody is going to agree to enter into a transaction with me. But if they do, they’ve agreed to pay my cost and abide by my terms.

The same is true of meals at a restaurant or sale of land or any other societal transaction. As a consumer of food, I can take as a personal stance the ideal that I’ll only eat food if I can know the recipe, but restaurants aren’t obligated to change their offering to account for me, any more than I’m obligated to eat at their establishments.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#128

Post by ddevault »

akerl_ wrote: post #127
ddevault wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>At what point in the process of making software does proprietary software become unethical? The start. >If I open a restaurant and sell food, but don’t publish my recipes, that isn’t unethical? No - this is also unethical. >If I make software, and I choose to offer it for money but not offer the source, what is unethical about my behavior? If software runs on the user's hardware or uses the user's data, I have a rig…

I think it’s clear that we have fundamentally differing opinions on what constitutes “ethics”. If I make something, it’s perfectly ethical for me to decide my criteria for giving it to somebody else. If the cost I impose or the restrictions I require are too onerous, nobody is going to agree to enter into a transaction with me. But if they do, they’ve agreed to pay my cost and abide by my terms. The same is true of m…

You're free to sell software at any cost the recipient is willing to pay, at least such that it squares with your concience. However, if you don't sell the source code with it, I consider that unethical.

Land is a finite resource with intrinsic value, not the same thing. So is the meal itself. Recipes are different.

We have social obligations. That's what being a society is.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#129

Post by hda2 »

AndrewUnmuted wrote: post #19
jjbinx007 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be nice if Youtube had a clear policy written in clear English (or indeed made a series of videos on the subject) explaining what's not allowed on the platform. Some channels post videos which stay up for years without any strikes or problems and then out of the blue the whole channel gets taken down under a vague "you violated our T&Cs" notice without Youtube bothering to highlight which of the T&Cs. They s…

> 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.

> 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.

I don't think they were lucky at all. There's always a "ism" assholes can hide behind to justify their actions, whether it's Racism, Terrorism, Communism, Nazism... etc. As well as the timeless "Think of the Children" shtick.

Re: YouTube removed a Cybersecurity channel without much reason

#130

Post by nmfisher »

TACIXAT wrote: post #122
racl101 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it so goofy that people never bother to save a local backup of work they spent hours and hours curating. Have they never ever written an essay on Microsoft Word and then lost the progress cause they never saved it on a floppy?

Videos are big. I have a YouTube channel and don't back my videos up. Quite the opposite, I regularly delete them to free up harddisk space. I do cross post them to lbry.tv though which I've found a lot better than peertube.

First time I've heard of lbry.tv - just curious, what's the main attraction for you?
Post reply on HN