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

Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

mediaite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 471 posts

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#381

Post by exporectomy »

neom wrote: post #254
eli wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like Germany should simply nationalize the platform if that's what they want.

Sad you're getting downvoted, I was thinking about this the other day, if nations really want to limit applications on the internet, they need to create a free to use high quality national alternative, and personally I don't think this is an awful idea. Canadian "twitter" provided by a gov entity? I would for sure be interested in that. The ability to use a home grown twitter that I needed to use some government ID t…

Good luck finding anyone else bothering to use it. Twitter isn't just some computer software, it's also network effects and the couldn't-have-been-predicted product of a competitive market. How would the government service be known in advance to become a Twitter and not a MySpace?

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#382

Post by SamBam »

thr0wawayaway wrote: post #377
heavyset_go wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only slightly more recently, the Dixie Chicks. They called up advertisers as well. If you want recent examples, look at WAP, its Super Bowl and Grammy's performances, Lil Nas X, or the NFL and Colin Kaepernick. There's also the witch hunt and boycott on teachers, companies and anyone else they believe are part of a nationwide critical race theory conspiracy.

Anyone claiming that critical race theory is a "conspiracy" is either massively misinformed, or being actively deceptive in order to push that very ideology. The National Education Association, a union with about 2.3 million members, has not only affirmed the existence of it, but is actively pushing for its inclusion in schools[1][2]: "Share and publicize, through existing channels, information already available on c…

The vast majority of those quotes have nothing to do with critical race theory, and are simply anti-racism. The two are not remotely synonymous, the former being a minor academic framework for studying history.

This confusion was deliberate work of a few conservative thinkers, who wanted an obscure "elitist" academic theory to use as a catch-all term for all anti-racism work.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/13/opinion/critical-race-the...

https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conse...

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#383

Post by exporectomy »

zadokshi wrote: post #367
josefx wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think about it this way, you build something that looks like a pub, provides the services of a pub and say you are open for business. Would it be really that surprising that the state enforces laws that apply to pubs on your business or would you tell the health inspector to fuck off and open his own pub if he has problems with it?

It’s the wrong analogy. Phone service is the correct one. It’s something basically everyone uses. You should be able to call or group call anyone you want. The phone company can’t claim they own the phone lines so they decide which content can be discussed or who is allowed to make a phone call. It’s that simple.

Whenever someone proposes a simple solution to a social or political problem that nobody can agree on, and says "It's that simple", they're marking themselves as not understanding what they're talking about while arrogantly pretending they do. It's automatically not simple or it wouldn't even be in the news. You certainly aren't the authority on it.

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#384

Post by genericone »

bpsh wrote: post #353
holoduke wrote: post #332

A good move. Everything so big as YouTube should follow national laws. Otherwise private terms of policies become more part of society than national ones. Then the hundreds of years of fighting becomes nothing and we are back in a modern kingdom based society.

What if it is an authoritarian government that enacts national laws for the purpose of censorship?

Companies themselves are authoritarian organizations that enact international policies for the purpose of extracting wealth from a local population. Countries that have skin in the game for their own geography are the least of your worries, they are optimizing locally. Meddlers without skin in the game are more problematic.

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#386

Post by RedComet »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #326
bobthechef wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. It isn't collectivism to regulate industries and companies that have enormous power to do good or harm. This idea that private property is unconditionally off limits is radically individualist and libertarian and just as bad as collectivism. We aren't atomized individuals. We all live in a society with a proper order and a common good. When a company begins to do harm to the common good, it must be regula…

The notion that "I can do what I want" as long as it takes place in the private sphere is absurd. So what's your take on Lawrence v. Texas?

Sodomy should be illegal. But what does that have to do with Google censoring dissent in foreign countries?

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#387

Post by Nasrudith »

alpaca128 wrote: post #112
voxic11 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's response to pressures from advertisers wasn't to censor anything. They just demonetized videos that the advertisers didn't want to be associated with. Hosting someone's video for free without even interrupting it with ads seems like the opposite of censorship to me. There may be something interesting to say about how the desires of advertisers shapes our discourse, but its not censorship (in this case at lea…

> Hosting someone's video for free without even interrupting it with ads seems like the opposite of censorship to me. Doesn't demonetization on YT just mean the ads still run but the money doesn't flow to the creator anymore? Considering YouTube does it that way with copyright claims and also automatically added ads to previously ad-free videos just because they could, it would surprise me if they'd remove video ads…

No that is from copyright claims and the holder's desire.

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#388

Post by Nasrudith »

ntrz wrote: post #7

> The German court held that YouTube failed to make its enforcement authority clear in its contract with the account operator who posted the video. Does YouTube's TOS really not contain statements giving them the ability to stop hosting any video, at any time, for any reason? Edit: I guess not: the only content removal clause I see is this one, which is definitely not "we can remove your video for any reason, as long…

That is also extremely hypocritical. Youtube is expected to have clearer TOS than the goddamned government?

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#389

Post by meowster »

deadalus wrote: post #32

Youtube Alternatives : Centralized : Dailymotion, Bitchute, Rumble, DTube, Vimeo, Vidlii Decentralized : Odysee(LBRY), Peertube

> Bitchute

Never heard of them, but they seem to have chosen a poor name that might be censored elsewhere due to the first five letters.

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#390

Post by bobthechef »

LatteLazy wrote: post #220
throwawayswede wrote: post #2

Good. I'd rather live in chaos than a world controlled by these technocrats. Let's do Twitter while we're at it.

Really? You'd rather your children died of a preventable disease than YT ban antivax lies? Really?

Opposition to _coerced COVID vaccination_, whether through law or through imposed burdens on those that don't, isn't antivax. Not even close. Speaking of lies, children are at virtually zero risk of death. Even if we put aside concerns about the COVID vaccine, there is no legitimate reason to require vaccination of the young. Being able to post videos that offer different points of view, many of them by healthcare professionals and people in medicine, is a good thing. The frantic desire to silence all discussion, no matter how level-headed and banal, that departs in the slightest from the "official narrative" only creates suspicion and distrust. We're not talking about censoring calls to violence (some of which were have not been censored by media platforms, btw, because the targets are political opponents). We're not even talking about weird conspiracy theories that barely anyone but a few people believe. We're talking about discussion about an experimental vaccine and the real dangers of COVID backed by data.

(And btw, the whole antivax "controversy" is a media circus. 98% of Americans have the full regime of vaccines. That's a lot of vaccines. There is no real antivax problem. It's media hype. This given even the moral objections to e.g. the rubella vaccine's origins.)

Post reply on HN