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

YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 763 posts

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#351

Post by dangoor »

prepend wrote: post #329

The more social media applies arbitrary rules to speech, the more likely they are to be regulated as common carriers. This puts a lot of restrictions and “the Internet” was against it. But these items are not illegal speech (although sometimes). These are private orgs and can legally ban whatever they want. However, phone companies are private too, but they have regulation controlling what is and is not allowed. The…

It seems to me that social media aren't the same as common carriers in that people can very easily switch from one to another.

I saw a headline saying that one gun video channel on YouTube was moving its videos to another site. They will no longer have access to YouTube's audience, but they are still free to post their videos in a publicly-accessible fashion.

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#352

Post by Moodles »

kerkeslager wrote: post #332
Moodles wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ideally, we don't allow corporations to control so much of our communications. What laws would you propose to actually implement this? I like free speech a lot as well, but it seems that boundaries get a bit fuzzy here. E.g. if you were to run your own forum like HN, don't you think you should be allowed to ban material from, say, KKK supporters?

>> Ideally, we don't allow corporations to control so much of our communications. > What laws would you propose to actually implement this? I didn't. Note that I didn't bring up laws until #2 in my previous post. Programs which educated people on the dangers of social media the same way we educate people around the dangers of drugs and alcohol might go toward changing the way we treat these things in our culture, but…

Thanks for answering. I think we're going a bit off-topic here though. The crux of what I'm getting at is, do you think that you should have the right to moderate the content on your own platform that you built? Or should the government decide what is and isn't allowed? E.g. maybe instead of you running HN, maybe you run a content distribution network. As its own your network, don't you think you should be allowed to decide which websites you host? Just think of something that disgusts you: extreme right wing, left wing, religious views, whatever. They're allowed in the US and they're using your platform. You hate them. Should you be forced to offer your services to them?

Note Cloudflare had this exact issue: https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/

These aren't rhetorical questions by the way. I'm genuinely wondering what HN thinks about this.

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#353

Post by purple-again »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #316
TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

America isn't other countries. Guns are as ingrained in rural America's culture as lifted trucks and beer. There would literally be armed revolts if the government tried taking peoples' guns away en masse.

"Don't take guns away from people to protect the populace because if you try to do it nutters with guns will shoot people"? That sounds like justification for taking people's guns from them.

Every time I see this argument come up people always try to frame it like it will be ‘nutters’ shooting ‘some’ people. You are very wrong, and that is the attitude that will get a lot of innocent people killed. This country is filled with rational, professional, well organized people who will kill before being disarmed.

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#354

Post by wu-ikkyu »

macspoofing wrote: post #346
moomin wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You want to start a personal crusade to change YouTube and Facebook’s standards, go ahead, that’s your first amendment right. Just don’t go taking sideswipes at others for exercising theirs.

I can't critize media personalities for their public viewpoints? What kind of standard are you actually advocating for?

Sounds like they want you censored for asking questions.

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#355

Post by krapp »

hueving wrote: post #318
krapp wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're mocking the intelligence of gun control supporters and doubting their sincerity and credibility. As you seem to be knowledgeable about the subject, and seem to believe that only persons such as yourself are qualified to have an opinion on the matter, what would you consider to be actually sensible gun regulation?

Pointing out ignorance is not mocking intelligence.

The tone of the comment seems intended to dismiss through ridicule, but that's beside the point. Its thesis that that one should have knowledge of guns and gun culture to have a credible opinion on gun legislation, so I'm merely asking that be followed up on, with an opinion on gun legislation from those with credible opinions.

I see a lot of dismissal of gun control advocates in threads like these, but arguments regarding gun control from those who claim authority on the matter tend to devolve towards strident defiance - "if you try to take my gun I will shoot you with it." That doesn't make for constructive discussion.

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#356

Post by Haydos585x2 »

macspoofing wrote: post #328
gtlondon wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We seem to be moving from an era when internet censorship was considered bad, to one where "It's OK, we're just censoring this". I have no sympathy towards gun use - but the principle of large monopolies applying their own morals to censor content seems wrong.

These tech companies were strated by idealistic young men who were initially all about free speech. They just got ground down from years of mainstream press criticism (who love taking potshots at tech companies), the outrage and 'activist' brigade (who now target their campaigns at platforms and advertisers), advertisers who now freak out over individual tweets and even the new tech elite class (e.g. Kara Swisher of…

The web still exists very much as it was. You could set up your own site and host any kind of weapons content you wanted assuming it fits with your local legislation. YouTube has no obligation to host your content. It's annoying that the best/most popular/easiest to use video service won't support you/these weapons channels but I don't think it really impacts on _free speech_. Plus, isn't the free speech crowd usually about letting private companies do what they want?

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#357

Post by humanrebar »

Waterluvian wrote: post #186

This continues to distract from the problem: systemic issues in American culture and society that perpetually re-primes a powder keg of fear and divisiveness. That sounds wordy but I just don't have the skill to articulate my feelings. There's just... something fundamentally wrong with how everything can feel so zero-sum.

People don't value tolerance anymore. You only need tolerance for things you don't like or understand.

Honestly, these sorts of things would work better if people acted locally more. It's human to be upset about the Parkland incident. It's not appropriate for a resident of Spokane to have strong feelings about Florida gun laws, let alone actually lobby for them. Discussing current events can be healthy, but only to the extent that it helps us develop our thoughts about how our local communities should work.

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#358

Post by prepend »

pasquinelli wrote: post #228
nbdev wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why have a society if you cannot trust the people in it to defend themselves?

why not defend yourself with something less likly to accidentally kill some random people?

Why not defend yourself with a towel??

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#359

Post by yequalsx »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #107
yequalsx wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And those weapons at the time were....muskets, bayonets. They had no vision of the M-16, AK-47, etc. The statement of the 2nd Amendment begins with, "A well regulated militia..." So let's well regulate it. According to Wikipedia: In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent up…

Please man, the pre-Heller 2008 argument of “well regulated” where you need to pretend means “lots of regulations” and not the real meaning of “well trained and in good working order” is tired. Leave that nonsense at Reddit. I used to... I still find it interesting how the “collective right” angle is pushed post Heller and MacDonald with the obviousness that’s always been there of “can you read the rest of the right…

I’m not a lawyer, never claimed to be an expert. Heller is a recent ruling. Previous rulings contradict Heller in some aspects. See, the way the Cinstituion is interpreted over time changes. It’s not like we are bound by a ruling for all eternity.

The reasoning is not tired. It’s how I interpret the text. Fortunately for your position my interpretation doesn’t matter since I’m not on the Supreme Court. Indeed, even decades after Roe v Wade people still argue against the reasoning used in that ruling and desire change.

It’s not nonsense to advocate for one's position just because there is a Supreme Court ruling against that position.

Re: YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans

#360

Post by ataturk »

gtlondon wrote: post #251
Rebelgecko wrote: post #15

This is very dismaying to see I have used Youtube in the past for seeing how to install gun accessories, put guns together, how to fix malfunctions, etc. Watching those videos has made me a more knowledgeable, and hence more responsible gun owner. This is an especially large blow for people who are part of niche communities, like reloading ammo for 100+ year old rifles. A lot of historical content will be lost. The n…

We seem to be moving from an era when internet censorship was considered bad, to one where "It's OK, we're just censoring this". I have no sympathy towards gun use - but the principle of large monopolies applying their own morals to censor content seems wrong.

"I have no sympathy towards gun use."

But you see you should because if the government in conjunction with private industry can ban the thing you don't like today, it can also ban the things you do like tomorrow.

You'll probably finally understand when the books start burning because that's right around the corner now.

Post reply on HN