Live data from Hacker News

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

tampafp.com

301–310 of 872 posts

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

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you’re going to test that too. Sounds interesting. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Seems to me like he is very clearly talking ab…

You admit his is talking clearly then? Many people seem to chose when to give him that consideration.

You have to forgive his genius occasionally overwhelming the average human’s ability to comprehend speech.

> “Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart —you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you’re a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.”

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

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Specious argument. First of all, the democrats did a lot of calling of elections into question, and so have republicans, and so what? Second, there has been an enormous amount of violence in the U.S. in the past several years, and the vast majority of that did not happen on 2021-01-06. Third, "storming" of capitols is a thing that has happened plenty in the U.S., and fairly recently too, once in the past year alone i…

Your argument seems to boil down to: “bad things have happened before, so bad things aren’t bad”. 1. In a close election, contesting it or demanding a recount is fine and sane. Step aside once the results of that process are in. Trying to discredit the entire system with a mountain of bullshit and overthrow an election when it is overwhelmingly clear that it did not go in your favor is an incredibly dangerous road fo…

I'm saying we don't do prior restraints on speech in the U.S. Law enforcement can take care of the rest.

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

#303
post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just my 2 cent crystal ball. Perhaps people want a more authoritarian world (without realizing it). The ratio of static to noise has been increasing year by year. People don't want to take (nor have) the time to balance alternate view points and spend the time to independently determine fact from opinion. I think the current lack of direction creates turmoil--there are too many options, too many sources of informatio…

The US will become authoritarian precisely because of thinking and assumptions such as yours. 1. Authoritarianism is not a good thing, hard stop. 2. The US is not a long way away from authoritarianism. It's one strongman with actual brains away from it. Making consessions like you suggest is precisely how we slip into authoritarianism.

> Authoritarianism is not a good thing, hard stop.

On a spectrum, where e.g. anarchy is on the other end, it is a good thing. Where to place the pin however is a challenge. Binary decisions such as that ("this thing can only be good or bad") is an extremely restricted way at seeing the world.

>The US is not a long way away from authoritarianism. It's one strongman with actual brains away from it.

I'd love to here why you think that.

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

#304
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, John Mearsheimer is now a Russian propagandist? You can disagree, but you may want to listen to one of your best thinkers in international politics.

This fellow was completely and utterly wrong about Putin, saying that he'd never invade. How can someone be proven so wrong about their life's work and still be called "one of your best thinkers in international politics."?

Source?

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

#305

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…

I hear that cameras that sign video files are coming. It sucks that we have reached this point but it seems like some mitigations against deep fakes will appear.

The novel Fuzzy Nation has cameras like that. Regular cameras are basically inadmissible in court.

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

#306
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get why people think youtube should be forced to host stuff they don’t want to host. Youtube should be socialized and forced to become a content-neutral storage? But why?!? We have the internet, where you can rent or run your own server and storage and post your conspiracy theory videos.

Because, like telephone companies youtube can be considered a monopoly and classified as a common carrier, as some states and proposed federal laws have argued.

What monopoly???

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

#307
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may have to reconsider this one, the title looks bad, but it's from a few years back and his opinions don't seem to align with Russia's in the slightest (among other things he has stated Ukraine should have kept their nuclear weapons as a deterrent for Russian invasion, in 1993).

I'm not sure Russia would disagree that the Ukraine should have kept their nuclear weapons if they wanted to maintain sovereignty

No post body was provided.

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

#308
Alphabet/YouTube should seek for government regulations that requires them to not delete the videos that are not explicitly illegal.

They keep removing videos to keep their advertisers or customers happy. If they are not allowed by the government to delete videos that are not illegal, they can just blame the government.

Of course, they should not be forced to keep every video. It has to be profitable for them.

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

#309
post #262

I’m becoming more convinced that the future I’ve been planning simply won’t be possible in the decades to come. The world is scarcely recognizable. And having experienced nothing but peace and prosperity makes me feel woefully unprepared. The WEIRD world is becoming increasingly more authoritarian. I’m already detached from real conflict and scarcity, knowing nothing but peace and prosperity, and the TikTok generatio…

Just my 2 cent crystal ball. Perhaps people want a more authoritarian world (without realizing it). The ratio of static to noise has been increasing year by year. People don't want to take (nor have) the time to balance alternate view points and spend the time to independently determine fact from opinion. I think the current lack of direction creates turmoil--there are too many options, too many sources of informatio…

> I think it's incredibly unlikely for the USA to become a dictatorship.

Yes but only until a violent event that strikes fear in the minds of the people. Then the government may convince people to give up their freedoms in the name of security.

I think the question is how dedicated are we to our values, not in good times, but in uncertain times.

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

#310
post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is completely different than claiming there were millions of hacked ballots and all kinds of other crazyness. Those are legitimate political arguments about voter suppression laws. No one on the left claimed Kemp and Republicans stuffed ballot boxes or China hacked whatever. The argument is based in facts. Many Republican controlled states, especially in the south, have historic issues with suppressing the votes…

[dead]

> - The Pennsylvania Supreme Court (not the legislature) changed their voting laws to accommodate widespread mail-in ballots and drop-boxes which was against the state constitution.

And yet no one challenged the law until after the third election it had taken effect. Until after the results had come out. There's a doctrine called laches: you have to complain about things that wrong you when you find about them, and if you wait too long, you don't get to complain anymore.

Furthermore, as for election challenges go, you're not going to invalidate any votes that had already been validly cast under the existing interpretation of law, even if the interpretation is incorrect per court rulings. For example, when there were last-minute challenges to absentee ballot procedures, any absentee ballots cast before the decision came out under the old procedures would still be valid, even if they didn't meet the new procedural requirements.

So anyone thinking that courts would invalidate election results via after-the-fact court challenges is either ignorant, lying to themselves, or is stuck somewhere in la-la land.

Post reply on HN