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

YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#151

Post by lsh123 »

dang wrote: post #129
lsh123 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dang, I grew up in Soviet Union and what I see in the last couple days looks exactly like communists doing in 30s (removing unwanted people from photos, firing from work, kids betraying their parents to authority, etc). While I don’t know the history of this account, I don’t think this comparison is far fetched and it is way closer than I thought I will ever see after coming to US 20 something years ago.

I hear you, but there are many ways of making the same point without breaking HN's rules, which call for avoiding flamebait, snark, name-calling and so on. For example, the way you've made your point here is well within the site guidelines. Also, please keep in mind that I didn't ban the GP account for that comment, but rather for a consistent pattern of breaking the rules and flouting our many requests to stop. HN's…

As I said, I don’t know the history of this account but this specific comment that got it banned doesn’t look bad to me.

BTW, I would personally ban all politics from HN.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#152

Post by creato »

rubyist5eva wrote: post #68

The only reason tech companies are doing this is because the democrats have a trifecta and they want to be in their good graces in order to avoid regulation. It's not about decency, it's about power.

Or maybe they are doing this because an unprecedented (in the US anyways) social media coordinated mob was perhaps less than a few minutes away from capturing and doing god knows what to the entire line of succession of our government.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#153

Post by [deleted] »

dieortin wrote: post #81
throwawaysea wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very true. Tens of thousands of Trump supporters showed up to DC this last week, attending one of several fully-legal, fully-permitted protests. Almost all events and participants were peaceful. A few hundred walked into the capitol complex, and I am guessing most did not initially plan to do so but got caught up in the moment, following those in front of them. Of those few hundred, an even smaller group was…

You say it like “getting caught in the moment” and assaulting the Capitol is something completely reasonable that anyone in that situation might do.

[deleted]

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#154

Post by donatj »

brg wrote: post #110
Osiris wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. These companies want to avoid government regulation / oversight. They are taking proactive actions to lessen the blame that would be assigned to them and thus (hopefully) avoid future regulatory action.

The problem I see is that they are walking directly in to oversight through their concerted actions. They are going to end up being labeled public utilities (identity, max comm, public market have already been labeled so).

At this point wouldn't that be better? They're used as such.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#155

Post by Aunche »

_qwfv wrote: post #51
shripadk wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It won't be. These bans and policies have been going on for a really long time. It is just hitting the US now. It has been happening in India for far too long. Big Tech monopoly has gone unchecked all this while. At least I am happy to see my fellow Indians uninstalling WhatsApp and moving to Signal. The more such alternative services the better. This stronghold of Big Tech on what internet should be has to end and i…

Research actually backs up that deplatforming does reduce audience sizes for an outlet. Which makes sense of you believe that some listeners will simply not have the interest in jumping over to a new platform. Repeat several times and with every platform shift the audience reduces.

I can see the benefit of deplatforming, but I don't see what the benefit of the AWS ban would be. There are plenty of cloud service providers out there, so little more than a temporary inconvenience.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#156

Post by 55555 »

mech422 wrote: post #114
cptskippy wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't about people having their civil liberties taken away. The social network bans are businesses protecting themselves from people whom threaten their business. Like a fast food restaurant refusing to serve customers who smoke crack in the restaurant. The platform and infrastructure bans are also businesses protecting themselves but not from people, rather from other businesses. This is on level with U-haul ba…

Indeed, no business wants to carry unnecessary liability. Funny, Didn't see all this crying about censorship when MC & Visa cut off pornhub... edit: just to be clear, I mean when MC & Visa decided pornhub was a potential liability, they cut them off. When companies decide Trump or Parler are a liability - they do the same - they cut them off. Thats just capitalism.

In my circles, there was huge backlash against the Pornhub decision by Visa and MC. It was a terrible action.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#157

Post by vehemenz »

Darmody wrote: post #72
e40 wrote: post #21

The lies are 100% of the reason the capital riot happened, so yes, they do need to stop. Fox News lies every single day. What do we expect from a population of people that only hear these lies, day in and day out? They're going to react just like they did on 1/6.

Do you believe Fox News should be banned/censored? What about CNN? They are as biased as Fox News.

Preposterous. CNN is not as biased as Fox News. Where does this narrative come from? After 9/11, I don't remember CNN becoming the propaganda machine for a political party courting religious zealots and xenophobic "patriots" while sliding into its own editorial extremism.

Even if CNN were as biased as Fox News, the problems would not end there. Fox News peddles misinformation, disinformation, white nationalism, resentment politics, and Trumpism (besides everything pre-Trump mentioned before). There's no really no comparison.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#158

Post by sn41 »

As a liberal and a person who believes in the milk of human kindness against all contrary evidence, I do have a problem with this overenthusiasm. When the trifecta becomes republican, will liberal podcasts be banned? There must be some arbitration. I believe flagging and moderation and proscribing individual videos is better than banning channels outright and deplatforming.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#159

Post by greesil »

tpmx wrote: post #48
tpmx wrote: post #2

I'm not even in the US, but all of this banning makes me really curious about what's being banned and why. Something that some of you may have missed: This banning thing already moved into the infrastructure/cloud services layer (AWS): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25707959

The AWS banning is what really concerns me. It's a clear escalation. First it's the app level (breached by Apple and Google), then the infrastructure level (breached by AWS - although there are alternatives here. Next up is DNS, I guess? And after that, routing. The ultimate Internet Death Penalty.

Easier to just seize the servers at that point, no?

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#160

Post by donatj »

dboreham wrote: post #132
ecommerceguy wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue the reason these type of people are pissed off is because they have been incessantly attacked for 4 plus years while watching the media turn a blind eye to anything that disparages any minority or "protected class." We spent 10 MONTHS watching riots every day. DC was BURNING in July.

No, they're pissed off due to whatever in their psychology. However, they're choosing to resort to violence due to lies being spread by Fox News et al. Other people were rioting due to truth about police actions. While all rioting is to be condemned, there isn't some symmetry between a scenario driven by lies and one driven by truth.

MLK said that violence was the language of the unheard. The silenced will turn to violence. That's not surprising in the least.
Post reply on HN