The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire • Hacker News Board

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#331

Post by wkjenjkwenf » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:29 AM UTC

phailhaus wrote: post #303

The author theorizes that this ban will inflame tensions, but I don't believe that's true. Look at Reddit's ban on toxic subreddits. They found that banning toxic subreddits reduced the toxicity in the website as a whole, and that "post-ban, hate speech by the same users was reduced by as much as 80-90 percent." [1] Reddit is just a closed system of communities; YouTube is one such community in the larger system of s…

Sure, it reduced tensions on reddit, but what about tensions everywhere else? The author doesn't care about how toxic Youtube is, he cares how toxic the US is. Pushing these radicals onto radical websites only further radicalizes them. That should be an axiomatic fact, yet nobody seems to understand it.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#332

Post by FlyMoreRockets » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:29 AM UTC

chordalkeyboard wrote: post #320

FlyMoreRockets wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should I be forced to pay for public schools if I don't have kids or disagree with what they are being taught? Yes you should. An informed populace is the basis of democracy. If you choose to continue living in a democracy, you have to help pay for its upkeep.

> Yes you should. Thank you. This is exactly the basis upon which we justify the proposal to force YouTube to host content that their shareholders would prefer not to host. Or the alternative formulation, this is the basis on which we justify prohibiting YouTube from censoring political speech that their shareholders disagree with.

You missed the most important point. It bears repeating: an informed populace is the basis of democracy.

A misinformed populace acts to destroy democracy.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#333

Post by will4274 » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:30 AM UTC

d1zzy wrote: post #230

will4274 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You have a right to say whatever you want to whomever you want without fear of government retaliation, as long as it isn't "hate speech" in a fairly narrow legal sense. This is what "having free speech in society" has always meant Wrong twice. First of all, the United States doesn't have laws against hate speech. The US Supreme Court has said hate speech is protected by the first amendment. So, you're protected fro…

And so have we proposed laws to regulate newspapers on what they should be and what they shouldn't be allowed to decline for publishing?

The article you are commenting on did not propose any new laws, nor did I in my comment. Did you mean to reply to somebody else or to comment on another article?

I don't think the government should require tech companies like Google to support free speech. I think Google should support free speech because it's the right thing to do. I believe the author of this article feels similarly, just as the editors of major American newspapers did from about 1600 to 2005.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#334

Post by glennpratt » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:30 AM UTC

chordalkeyboard wrote: post #320

FlyMoreRockets wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should I be forced to pay for public schools if I don't have kids or disagree with what they are being taught? Yes you should. An informed populace is the basis of democracy. If you choose to continue living in a democracy, you have to help pay for its upkeep.

> Yes you should. Thank you. This is exactly the basis upon which we justify the proposal to force YouTube to host content that their shareholders would prefer not to host. Or the alternative formulation, this is the basis on which we justify prohibiting YouTube from censoring political speech that their shareholders disagree with.

No, that would be the basis for the US to stand up its own video publishing platform. Forcing YouTube to host content it doesn't wish to is "un-American".

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#335

Post by charonn0 » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:31 AM UTC

chordalkeyboard wrote: post #310

charonn0 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Surely you agree those laws (against eavesdropping) were passed for a reason and are not arbitrary? I'm puzzled by the question. My position on wiretapping laws is beside the point. > People are not basing their criticisms on the violation of a contract but on the public good of the free exchange of information. Again, this is puzzling because it doesn't seem related to the topic at hand. You asked a direct questio…

> I'm puzzled by the question. My position on wiretapping laws is beside the point. No, it isn't. Spartan-S63 seem to be advocating [0] YouTube can moderate their platform however they like. souprock suggests [1] that same logic allows the phone company to disconnect anyone who criticizes the phone company. You say [2] that doesn't apply because that would require breaking the law. I'm observing that the law you refe…

[0] isn't mine.

I've only commented on the phone company analogy.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#336

Post by Talanes » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:31 AM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #305

FlyMoreRockets wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should I be forced to pay for public schools if I don't have kids or disagree with what they are being taught? Yes you should. An informed populace is the basis of democracy. If you choose to continue living in a democracy, you have to help pay for its upkeep.

A vast majority of the people who are too stupid to realize these questionable youtube videos are hoaxes(and therefore need to be protected from them) went to public school.

A vast majority of the people who immediately recognize these YouTube videos are fake also went to public school. Something like ninety percent of America goes to public school, you can cite them as a vast majority for almost any American activity and probably be right.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#337

Post by chillacy » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:31 AM UTC

justinzollars wrote: post #160

siliconc0w wrote: post #47

It is amazing to me that there are so many people, smart people even, that are adamant that we shouldn't have free speech in society.

> It is amazing to me that there are so many people, smart people even, that are adamant that we shouldn't have free speech in society. This can be attributed to nothing more than personal political bias. There is no way these people would be arguing for censorship if the censorship favored the other side. It also makes me want to move. There is no advantage to being an American without the freedom of speech and pres…

Where could you move that has more freedom of speech and press than the US? Asking for a friend...

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#338

Post by wkjenjkwenf » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:32 AM UTC

ipython wrote: post #219

swiley wrote: post #2

If you reject the idea that people are intelligent enough to think about politics for themselves then you reject the idea that they're intelligent enough to govern themselves. Democracy and free speech are intrinsically linked.

Why is it that we have to ignore nuances in these arguments? We never had unrestricted free speech in this country. There is a whole Wikipedia article about it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_ex... In addition other democratic states have strict limits on free speech such as Singapore: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_14_of_the_Constituti... After all even “democracy” is nuanced here…

What a stupid argument. "Child pornography and obscenity are banned, therefore democracy does not rely on free speech, therefore we don't need free speech at all." Obviously "free speech" comes with the colloquially-understood fact that it doesn't include child pornography.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#339

Post by amanaplanacanal » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:33 AM UTC

justinzollars wrote: post #314

olefoo wrote: post #150

This is all the result of confusing 1st amendment rights with the right to access the audience that gathers at a particular URL. What Taibbi is asking for is that the guy who tells you that drinking rat poison is good for you should be allowed an audience and that even putting a warning alongside the video would be an infringement on his rights. Looking at the comments here I have to conclude that HN is no longer on…

> Looking at the comments here I have to conclude that HN is no longer on board critical thinking much less common sense. The book burners are running the show. And the complaints you see on hackernews are just people with no power or influence complaining about the censorship you support. Seems like a decision was already made by people much more powerful than us, and this is the path we are on. Free speech and free…

> Free speech and freedom of the press are over. America is done. Nothing special about this place anymore.

Given that you can still say and print pretty much anything you want, I'd say this is a little over the top.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#340

Post by Ottolay » Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 2:34 AM UTC

wkjenjkwenf wrote: post #331

phailhaus wrote: post #303

The author theorizes that this ban will inflame tensions, but I don't believe that's true. Look at Reddit's ban on toxic subreddits. They found that banning toxic subreddits reduced the toxicity in the website as a whole, and that "post-ban, hate speech by the same users was reduced by as much as 80-90 percent." [1] Reddit is just a closed system of communities; YouTube is one such community in the larger system of s…

Sure, it reduced tensions on reddit , but what about tensions everywhere else? The author doesn't care about how toxic Youtube is, he cares how toxic the US is. Pushing these radicals onto radical websites only further radicalizes them. That should be an axiomatic fact, yet nobody seems to understand it.

Maybe because it's not an axiomatic fact. There has been niche radical internet communities for ages. It has only been with the radical communities coming into the mainstreams ones (reddit, twitter, and facebook)that the radical communities exploded.