YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

Post by kelp » Wed, Jul 03, 2019, 7:42 PM UTC

chrisco255 wrote: post #208

kelp wrote: post #157

Lets keep in mind that YouTube has been around for 14 years... In societal terms that's a relatively short amount of time to have a free platform where anyone can post their ideas, no matter how crazy or toxic. Before that, you could blog. Before that, you could stand on a street corner and yell, or maybe use a megaphone. The platforms for broadcasting your message to a large audience were mostly gated, often by larg…

Neither TV nor radio quite fits the analogy... because these are broadcast 1:many mediums. And the idea that no one has a right to have their message amplified to millions is sort of insidious and evil. Because the consumers choose what to watch on YouTube. And the users produce the content. So this more like a virtual community with billions of micro-interactions. Of course it scales. The internet is a testiment to…

Post by root_axis » Wed, Jul 03, 2019, 7:43 PM UTC

tyscorp wrote: post #144

rubicon33 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could definitely get behind your point if the subject were the government. It's not, though I understand the sentiment is the same. At the end of the day YouTube is a private company. Yea, a very big one with huge reach, but private nonetheless. Taking a subjective moral position is something companies have been doing for a long time. If you disagree with them, don't give them your $ (don't use youtube).

I think with the power and influence these private companies wield and the huge effects they can have on society, the distinction between the standards we hold gov vs private to is arbitrary and only remain for historical reasons. It doesn't have to be that way just because it always was.

Post by sergiotapia » Wed, Jul 03, 2019, 7:43 PM UTC

tasty_freeze wrote: post #143

AWildC182 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they themselves are also terrible people, I can't imagine that they don't have some plan to combat this given how obvious of a problem it's been. They mention respect in the header at least...

How do they combat that without being accused, as youtube is here, of censorship? Will they disallow child porn? How about videos advocating violence against specific people? How about obviously libelous videos, like ones claiming, say, Donald Trump is running a child prostitution ring from the basement of a pizza parlor? When they get sued for hosting such content, who is going to pay their legal bills?

Post by influx » Wed, Jul 03, 2019, 7:43 PM UTC

rifung wrote: post #73

influx wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are security professional supposed to learn how to secure systems? This is silly, and I'm not surprised that Google is leaning towards censorship again. Where are all the Google cloud employees when you need them commenting on threads?

> Where are all the Google cloud employees when you need them commenting on threads? I am a Google employee though not in Cloud. I am not really sure what commenting is going to accomplish here? I don't agree with this and many other things Google does, whether it be in my org or elsewhere. I am sure this is the case for many employees just from internal communications. Google is a huge company so I suppose this is j…

Post by lone_haxx0r » Wed, Jul 03, 2019, 7:44 PM UTC

Aelius wrote: post #217

whatshisface wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vimeo isn't clean, they banned Alex Jones for believing (edit: and yes, saying) unacceptable things.

Your definition of "free speech" includes not taking action against truly malicious and slanderous and manipulative people like Alex Jones? And there is no "who draws the line‽" argument here, Jones exists miles beyond what is ever ok.