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

Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 803 posts

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#141

Post by wolvesechoes »

snovymgodym wrote: post #61

Feels like YouTube is ripe for disruption. In the recent past (say up to the mid 2010s) it was a really good product and there was a reason nobody gave a shit about Vimeo et al, YouTube as a site, app, platform was so far ahead of the competition. But now? Youtube is full of slop, search barely works, and Google is on an endless campaign to make ad-blocking and free downloading impossible. Even most of the "good" cha…

"Feels like YouTube is ripe for disruption."

To keep BigTechs in check you need a strong state with a proper legislation. To achieve it, you need a political power to create such legislation and force your decision-makers to adopt it.

Fantasy that some FOSS project or bunch of brave entrepreneurs backed by YC will actually make a difference is just it - a fantasy.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#142

Post by ZephyrBlu »

touristtam wrote: post #106
anonymousiam wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> has continuously curbed free speech over the past few decades mmm do you have example at hand or you are just repeating this in the hope that other with voice the same opinion? The UK has a freedom of expression law: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part... 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart informati…

It is a massive meme that people get arrested in the UK for saying things which would be protected in the US.

https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/05/15/britains-police...

https://archive.ph/vaCkJ

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#143

Post by timewizard »

touristtam wrote: post #106
anonymousiam wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> has continuously curbed free speech over the past few decades mmm do you have example at hand or you are just repeating this in the hope that other with voice the same opinion? The UK has a freedom of expression law: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part... 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart informati…

They also have a law against murder.

So super weird that people actually get away with murder still.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#144

Post by Lio »

cookiemonsieur wrote: post #117
Lio wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t be silly. The UK may not be perfect but no one’s going to complain if you compare the Prime Minister or the King to a cartoon bear. Or you talk openly about a government fuck up. Or about one part of the country maybe deciding to become independent. You just can’t shout fire in a crowded cinema and you can’t say “let’s all meet at the local hotel at 3.30 and burn the immigrants to death” during a riot. I’m ok w…

> The UK may not be perfect but no one’s going to complain if you compare the Prime Minister or the King to a cartoon bear. But if you compare Zionism to another eerily similar 20th century europe ism, a lot of people will, indeed, complain.

I think if you were sensitive you could still have that conversation. People might very well complain, as is their right, but they’d still allow it if you were sensitive.

The problem is that the Jewish community in the UK is relatively small and vulnerable and there is the tendency for such discussion to turn ugly and affect the lives of all British Jews regardless of their thoughts on Zionism.

We don’t want you burning Korans outside of mosques and we don’t want you throwing paint at people on their way to temple.

I’m not religious but I don’t want either of those situations. There are more effective ways to help those in trouble than starting pub fights.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#145

Post by slg »

jaapz wrote: post #136
slg wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These slippery slope comments always seem a little naive to me because they imply there is some pure way to handle moderation. In practice, you have to be an extremist to think literally no content should be removed from Youtube with the most obvious example of something nearly everyone wants to be removed being CSAM. Maybe you would respond by saying that is illegal and only illegal content should be taken down. Acc…

> In practice, you have to be an extremist to think literally no content should be removed from Youtube with the most obvious example of something nearly everyone wants to be removed being CSAM. This is not what is being said in the comments you are replying to, you are taking it to the other extreme yourself

Yes, I intentionally included an extreme example to highlight my point. However, that was not the only example included. Would you like to respond to my whole comment or just that single cherry-picked sentence?

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#146

Post by teamonkey »

carlosjobim wrote: post #126
Lio wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t be silly. The UK may not be perfect but no one’s going to complain if you compare the Prime Minister or the King to a cartoon bear. Or you talk openly about a government fuck up. Or about one part of the country maybe deciding to become independent. You just can’t shout fire in a crowded cinema and you can’t say “let’s all meet at the local hotel at 3.30 and burn the immigrants to death” during a riot. I’m ok w…

In some countries you are not allowed to criticize the politicians. In other countries you are allowed to criticize the politicians, but not their policy. The difference is not that big.

But also not the case in the UK, where complaining about both politicians and policy is a national passtime

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#147

Post by ben_w »

atemerev wrote: post #124
cookiemonsieur wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The UK may not be perfect but no one’s going to complain if you compare the Prime Minister or the King to a cartoon bear. But if you compare Zionism to another eerily similar 20th century europe ism, a lot of people will, indeed, complain.

Zionism is the notion that the state of Israel has the right to exist. Opposing Zionism is the call to destruction of the entire nation-state, and, therefore, a call to genocide. (Opposing the actions of said state is, of course, a natural right and can be freely expressed by anyone).

Unfortunately for that meaning of the word — and a few million people stuck in the middle — two completely different groups of racists are both simultaneously coopting it to stir up hatred for their enemies, who are the other group.

> (Opposing the actions of said state is, of course, a natural right and can be freely expressed by anyone)

Unfortunately, the "soldier mindset" (as opposed to scout mindset) is dominant in this case, and I fear suggesting why would be rejected because of that very mindset. So no, the freedom is not there in practice.

"You're with us or against us" kind of thing, but only with the most expansive definition of what counts.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#148

Post by timewizard »

slg wrote: post #130
KurSix wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you normalize vague enforcement around "problematic" content, the net just keeps widening

These slippery slope comments always seem a little naive to me because they imply there is some pure way to handle moderation. In practice, you have to be an extremist to think literally no content should be removed from Youtube with the most obvious example of something nearly everyone wants to be removed being CSAM. Maybe you would respond by saying that is illegal and only illegal content should be taken down. Acc…

> a line somewhere for normal people to actually want to use the site.

Youtube is a private company. They can make whatever additional moderation decisions beyond the law they want. Which are in no way based on what you want but are entirely based on what advertisers want. This control effectively answers every question you raised.

In any case, Youtube is the size where it can grapple with all these questions you just posed, but anyone else hoping to challenge their monopoly or otherwise host a small collection of videos, perhaps for a specific purpose or community, now effectively cannot.

> but there is always going to be an ongoing debate on its exact placement.

Who exactly started _this_ debate? Was there some recent outcry from the citizens that their lives have become unlivable due to the lax content restrictions on social media? Really?

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#149

Post by IshKebab »

KurSix wrote: post #72

YouTube's moderation feels like it’s being done by a drunk Roomba half the time... totally missing context, especially when it comes to open source and self-hosting content. Meanwhile, there's a flood of actual piracy tutorials that stay up for years. Your video gets flagged for showing people how to use LibreELEC, but somehow there are entire channels pushing borderline NSFW content under the guise of "body art" or…

I think this is probably a problem with most internet moderation. You saw the same thing on StackOverflow - moderators spending big chunks of time going through a queue of things to moderate, so they use heuristics rather than really understanding the item.

Also most of the things in the queue should get "no" as an answer, so they just get into the habit of "no, no, no, no...".

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#150

Post by reddalo »

ezconnect wrote: post #78
gloosx wrote: post #49

Since Youtube started to show me funny "TURN OFF THE ADBLOCKER!!!" notices, I just started slamming links in yt-dlp and watching them offline. No drawbacks so far.

Mine is now being limited to 3 videos and a warning we will block you next time. They also removed the wide view button. I just copy the link and watch it on Firefox nightly not logged in to youtube with adblock and youtube does not complain. A bit of a hassle but I can still watch.

Are you using uBlock Origin on Firefox?
Post reply on HN