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

YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

tampafp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 872 posts

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#191

Post by dillondoyle »

freedomben wrote: post #7

One of the hosts wrote this about it [1]: particularly appropriate quote: > What casual observers might not understand, however, is just how far the policy goes. Not only does YouTube punish channels that spread misinformation, but in many cases, it also punishes channels that report on the spread of misinformation. The platform makes no distinction between the speaker and the content creator. If a channel produces a…

It's just bad 'AI' because they won't give up revenue to do what would be required to actually avoid censorship while still cracking down on coordinated bs.

I think we need a better word than censorship.

More like inept penny pinchers.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#192

Post by cryptonector »

lijogdfljk wrote: post #189
cryptonector wrote: post #158

If it's nonsense, then why censor it? If it's not nonsense, then why censor it?

If it's instructions on drinking bleach, why censor it? The discussion has to be one of nuance, but i think back to the days of TVs (lol). TV and radio had (to my understanding) laws about what you can say on air, different than what you would encounter on the sidewalk. It seems to make sense. After all, piping instructions on drinking bleach into everyones home seems bad. Inciting riots in mass seems bad. I don't kn…

> If it's instructions on drinking bleach, why censor it?

Not comparable.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#193

Post by ada1981 »

AaronFriel wrote: post #133
natsup123490 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard times and war change people. Many changes are negative: poorer, less secure, less trusting, more fearful, devastating losses. But other changes are for the better. And you don't need war to make these changes. If you make them before hard times come, you'll be better prepared for them: becoming more stoic (less emotional, less offended at everything), becoming more serious, more resourceful, more self-reliant, l…

All of the things you wrote as good things are (mostly) good things, glittering generalities that have no bearing on whether hard times are good or bad. To connect the two, you'd have to complete the scurrilous reference made that we are currently in a time of "weak men". You may or may not be aware that the "Hard times..." meme is widely used among not just stoics, but also fascist groups to suggest that the current…

I fear a people that make their life and policy decision based on Internet memes.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#194

Post by RajT88 »

pg5 wrote: post #136
throw_nbvc1234 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wait until GPT3 deep-fake audio. Closely followed by Deep-fake video. And algorithms will amplify this content to the echo chambers that "want" to hear it to increase ad revenue a few percentage points. All this will enter society at a time when trust in institutions is already low; you already hear some people predicting that there may not be an election with uncontested results (in the USA) ever again. If we s…

Hate to say it, but deepfake audio and video are already pretty convincing (though post processing is needed)

Post processing or just lowering the resolution?

Filming a deepfake with a DV cam pointed at your screen is very convincing. Sadly.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#197

Post by dane-pgp »

mberning wrote: post #44
TameAntelope wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious about where you see an institutionalized support on the left for election tampering claims, if you have any sources.

Quoted post unavailable.

Even the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee agreed that Russian collusion was a real issue:

> It is our conclusion, based on the facts detailed in the Committee's Report, that the Russian intelligence services' assault on the integrity of the 2016 U.S. electoral process[,] and Trump and his associates' participation in and enabling of this Russian activity, represents one of the single most grave counterintelligence threats to American national security in the modern era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_...

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#198

Post by DenisM »

bckr wrote: post #126
oliveroak wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why don't they build their own platform? youtube can do what they want on their website.

I agree with this sentiment, although I agree it's stupid that The Hill was suspended. If anyone wants to give a reason why these arguments are always about freedom of speech VS censorship, instead of being about private property + free markets, please I'm open to this.

1. Markets fails under the weight of monopolies. Youtube needs to be broken up or regulated.

2. There was a supreme court decision that a platform (in that case a large mall) that makes itself a de-facto public square has to act like one, accruing responsibility to protect speech. I believe this is the right link: https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/583/pruneyard-s...

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#199

Post by [deleted] »

aiisjustanif wrote: post #84
rsfern wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Fiona Hill, we’re already in it. She doesn’t really indicate when we crossed the rubicon, but I guess there doesn’t always have to be a Franz Ferdinand moment? https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-...

According to Fiona Hill that is not the definition of a world war. World Wars have been defined by battles in multiples countries and continents. The Syrian civil war was over 15 countries and factions. War in Afghanistan over 5 countries, technically much more. None of these wars were consider WW3, and just because the war between Ukraine and Russia is in Europe doesn’t make it any different.

[deleted]

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#200

Post by lostcolony »

coldtea wrote: post #145
kemiller wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a huge difference: in Bush v. Gore, Gore stepped aside for the good of the country, choosing to respect the institution of the courts even if the decision was dodgy. Trump is willing to burn down the institutions if it gives him an edge. The danger from the Trump narrative is not that die-hards are still grumbling, it's that the candidate doesn't seem to care about anything beyond his own interests.

> There's a huge difference: in Bush v. Gore, Gore stepped aside for the good of the country, choosing to respect the institution of the courts even if the decision was dodgy And why would that be the better way to go about it? Respecting an election you consider stolen that an institution favored to "respect the institution" means you're respecting a faulty institution - and encouraging similar behavior in the futur…

Because that institution then worked another four times without incident. The institution, as flawed as it is, still kept transferring power peacefully.

In 2020's case, there was no dodginess, but nevertheless one candidate would rather discredit the institution rather than admit he lost, and -there is nothing to replace it with-. We've had 250 years of peaceful transfers of power because of this system; without a universally agreed to system to transfer power, we will have civil war.

Post reply on HN