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

Google stifles YouTube competitor LBRY, banning it for pedantic reasons

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–36 of 36 posts

Re: Google stifles YouTube competitor LBRY, banning it for pedantic reasons

#31

Post by shi314 »

SCLeo wrote: post #24
noxer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its because google wants to give the apps to kids which they can not do if the apps show porn. Its should however not include user generated content that has to be searched on these apps. Else a browser would have to be removed too.

Pardon my ignorance but I really don't know why kids should not be allowed to watch porn. I tried to look it up, but all results I looked at either claim it is ok for children to watch porn or just jump to teach you how to prevent your children from watching porn while assuming you already know why porn is harmful. Honestly, I doubt that there will be significant damage, especially if the people watching are already…

Considering women in 60s sue men for sexual experience in their teens suggest some women are not suited for it in teens or even 20s for this matter.

Re: Google stifles YouTube competitor LBRY, banning it for pedantic reasons

#32

Post by chaorace »

shi314 wrote: post #31
SCLeo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pardon my ignorance but I really don't know why kids should not be allowed to watch porn. I tried to look it up, but all results I looked at either claim it is ok for children to watch porn or just jump to teach you how to prevent your children from watching porn while assuming you already know why porn is harmful. Honestly, I doubt that there will be significant damage, especially if the people watching are already…

Considering women in 60s sue men for sexual experience in their teens suggest some women are not suited for it in teens or even 20s for this matter.

I can guarantee you that nobody has ever been sued for having a "sexual experience". The word you're avoiding is rape.

Re: Google stifles YouTube competitor LBRY, banning it for pedantic reasons

#33

Post by fuzxi »

charia wrote: post #15
fuzxi wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cuties.

A tangent about Cuties, but felt like airing my thoughts on this somewhere. The outrage over Cuties is some of the weirdest situations of political/cultural toxoplasma I've seen. The movie has nothing that's considered abnormal to what pre-teens and teens are exposed and engage in modern western culture. Girls are exposed to the dances/ect that sexualize them everywhere from social media platforms (tiktok, ect) and i…

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and sexually exploits children like a duck...

Re: Google stifles YouTube competitor LBRY, banning it for pedantic reasons

#34

Post by ALittleLight »

charia wrote: post #15
fuzxi wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cuties.

A tangent about Cuties, but felt like airing my thoughts on this somewhere. The outrage over Cuties is some of the weirdest situations of political/cultural toxoplasma I've seen. The movie has nothing that's considered abnormal to what pre-teens and teens are exposed and engage in modern western culture. Girls are exposed to the dances/ect that sexualize them everywhere from social media platforms (tiktok, ect) and i…

I don't think people object to the message of the film, but rather the content. It's not that people think the plot contains anti-female themes, but that the movie shows sexualized images of children.

Re: Google stifles YouTube competitor LBRY, banning it for pedantic reasons

#35

Post by noxer »

SCLeo wrote: post #24
noxer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its because google wants to give the apps to kids which they can not do if the apps show porn. Its should however not include user generated content that has to be searched on these apps. Else a browser would have to be removed too.

Pardon my ignorance but I really don't know why kids should not be allowed to watch porn. I tried to look it up, but all results I looked at either claim it is ok for children to watch porn or just jump to teach you how to prevent your children from watching porn while assuming you already know why porn is harmful. Honestly, I doubt that there will be significant damage, especially if the people watching are already…

>Pardon my ignorance but I really don't know why kids should not be allowed to watch porn.

How is that relevant? The law in any relevant place says you are not allowed to show porn to kids. Google has to follow that. Harmful or not is completely irrelevant same with the fact that kinds can use a browser to search porn. No one cares. Everyone just does whatever is needed to not get sued so they all do the same and delete visible unrequested/non-searched porn because that would trigger adults to sue. Its not about right/wrong its just money/lawsuits/PR damage etc.

Re: Google stifles YouTube competitor LBRY, banning it for pedantic reasons

#36

Post by meibo »

ilaksh wrote: post #28

I am actually unable to install the raw apk. After changing the allowed source setting and getting through the warnings, it says it is installing but at the end just says "App not installed". This is why we need to support open source hardware and mobile operating systems. But the large companies work together to close the existing networks. So we also need things like mesh networks and alternative service providers.…

This means that your device architecture or Android version wasn't compatible, and not that Google is censoring your free speech. If you look into the logs you'll see why it was the case.

The only way Google polices APK installs is via Play Protect which warns you of APKs that aren't commonly installed/marked as harmful, with an option to bypass the warning. You can also disable that.

Post reply on HN