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

291–300 of 803 posts

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

#291

Post by prmoustache »

touristtam wrote: post #123
hardwaresofton wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, sometimes -- I think TikTok's content/goals are a bit different than YouTube. TikTok is a direct competitor to YouTube Shorts, but not YouTube as a whole -- YouTube also competes with Netflix and surprisingly paid course sites (did you know YouTube has courses?) I don't think it's as easy as thinking TikTok will unseat YouTube. Also, I personally think TikTok's... approach is a bit hard to sustain. Just like Fac…

> TikTok is a direct competitor to YouTube Shorts That sounds odd since I recall them comparing themselves to IG shorts, and YT shorts not being a thing while TT was becoming the in social media; just an observation, more than anything else.

They are still a competitor in the sense they are with instagram actively engaged in the task of reducing people's average attention span which makes the traditional youtube format less popular.

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

#292

Post by Lio »

Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote: post #249
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…

[flagged]

> which the new administration is rightly cracking down on according to you.

I've made no comment on that at all as I don't think it's germain to current the conversation and I have nothing useful to say about it.

I'm not sure which country you're actually talking about but your use of the word "administration" makes me think it's somewhere other than here; we form governments in the UK not administrations.

Pro-palestine events have been going on in public continuously in the UK since the current episode started. There are several today even and you could go to them if you want to, no one is cracking down on that here.

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

#295

Post by babushkaboi »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #212
babushkaboi wrote: post #103

Yeah, and it's not just YouTube's moderation that's messed up. Their whole governance model tilts hard against creators. I have a creator friend who was telling me that newswire agencies are gaming a loophole in YT’s copyright policy to extort creators. Basically, they threaten takedowns unless the creator pays up. Even when creators argue their use falls under "fair use" for reporting, YT’s 3 strike policy doesn’t c…

> Creators are stuck between losing their life's work and paying up just to stay online. Concerning "[c]reators are [...] losing their life's work": you are telling me that these creators don't have private backups of their videos (or if they accidentally really don't wouldn't at least download their own videos from YouTube to get at least a re-encoded version of their video)?

losing a channel isn't just losing their files. It's losing their reach, momentum and shot at staying visible. Backups don't fix that.

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

#297

Post by PeterStuer »

ulrikrasmussen wrote: post #220
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…

The problem is the nature of YouTube, which is a platform with the main purpose of generating revenue based on advertisement while minimizing their own operational risk. YouTube does not care one bit about whether the content they show is informative, harmful or entertaining, they care about maximizing the amount of ad impressions while avoiding legal repercussions (only if the legal repercussions carry a significant…

" ... bit about whether the content they show is informative, harmful or entertaining, they care about maximizing the amount of ad impressions while avoiding legal repercussions"

Close, but no cigar. If you have a sector with giant add spend, you grant them full control, regardless of the add impressions. People talk a lott about 'regulatory capture', but 'media capture' is just as real.

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

#298

Post by zanfr »

belorn wrote: post #266
shakna wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We also suppress videos on the correct manufacturing process for plastic explosives. Not because doing it safely is a bad idea, but because proliferating bomb making materials is. Covid disinformation got people killed. It will continue to get people killed, especially with a proponent of it leading the US health service. Things likely to lead to death, are likely things you do not want on your platform.

Since Swedish policy during covid, produced by medical professionals and researchers, was contrary to US policy during covid, this kind of information was also removed. You do not have this kind of disagreement within the professional field with bomb making materials. Pandemic prevention is an on-going research topic where a lot of different professionals has wild difference in views and approaches, and the meta stud…

Sweden is widely recognized as the example to absolutely not follow in handling pandemics.

N95s (and above) definitely work, so does filtered air. But sweden has a long standing history of eugenics

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

#299

Post by ekianjo »

shakna wrote: post #258
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Covid disinformation got people killed. If they trust bad medical advice on YouTube and die, it's their problem.

Its the problem of those they affect. "Infectious" is not self-contained to a singular individual. Its also a problem for the platform - who is now party to it happening. YouTube allowing bad medical advice will hurt YouTube. Their safest option, is to disallow it.

[flagged]

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

#300

Post by zanfr »

saint_yossarian wrote: post #276
thrance wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's everyone's. Herd immunity can only be achieved if a sufficiently large part of the population is vaccinated. Also, and I know basic empathy is a foreign concept nowadays, but what if I wished for my fellow to not die of a preventable disease because a grifter sold them on an insane idea?

> Herd immunity can only be achieved if a sufficiently large part of the population is vaccinated. ...or getting infected, of course.

sadly getting infected just means the virus will nuke your immune system (not to mention your endothelium)
Post reply on HN