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

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

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 701 posts

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

#431

Post by davesmith1983 »

dageshi wrote: post #269
davesmith1983 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect many people were saying the same about the printing press when that was invented. "If anyone can print something quickly, how can will we stop the peasants from printing their own books". Many would could say same about open source software, people developing their own technology. They are doing their own thing, there is a lot of rubbish code (noise) to good open source code (signal). Maybe a large company…

Personally honestly I don't have a problem with people saying what they want to say even if I disagree with it. My problem is that some people suddenly decided that platforms like Youtube are suddenly required to host any and all content when those platforms have always been privately owned and always had various rules which were subject to change. People have suddenly decided that youtube is somehow quasi public pro…

This is another argument I hear often. Firstly I don't think many people aren't making that argument at all. People are complaining about Youtube's policies and how they deal with speech on their platform.

Youtube don't appear to apply their policies in an even handed manner. I think most people would be fine if Youtube if their enforcement was strict, IF it was fair.

However enforcement of TOS seems to be arbitrary and seems to be either politically motivated, incoherent or a knee jerk reaction to whatever the current moral panic at the time is. This isn't helped by the fact that any of the appeal mechanisms on the site seem to work on random chance principles.

As for whether Youtube is some sort of public service. Keep in mind it is a monopoly on online user generated video. There is no other site that even comes close.

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

#432

Post by holy_city »

gen3 wrote: post #15

Does this mean that all the reverse engineering videos, con talks, prof of exploit demos, CTF walkthroughs', and fuzzing tutorials will be removed? What about videos showing me how to use tools like Twistlock? Will they be exempt, but videos about burp be banned? What constitutes a "secure" computer system? Side note, I guess its time to fire up youtube-dl. Are there any channels that need to be archived? I normally…

Exploiting a buffer overflow in sprintf was a lab assignment in my computer architecture course, iirc I had to watch a few youtube videos to really understand what I needed to do (my TA wasn't particularly helpful).

Not to go all slippery slope, but are BosnianBill and the Lock Picking Lawyer next?

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

#433

Post by [deleted] »

feanaro wrote: post #248
oconnor663 wrote: post #145

Devil's advocate: There's a very thin line between e.g. the Lockpicking Lawyer doing reviews of different padlock brands and e.g. an instructional video about how to break into someone's house. YouTube knows that if someone posts home invasion instructions, and then someone else watches those instructions and commits a crime, the news media will absolutely 100% blame YouTube, and politicians will jump on them to scor…

Since when is censorship for the sake of preventing people from acquiring knowledge that may be used in a later crime even on the table? This is insanity.

[deleted]

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

#435

Post by afthonos »

jlawson wrote: post #411
afthonos wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t about Google. I reject Project Veritas as a source of evidence . I take no public position on Google, not least because I work there and don’t speak for them. This isn’t a demand for rigor, isolated or otherwise, because I genuinely didn’t know what this was about before your comment. The history of the thread went: - Some vague statement - Someone expressing confusion - Someone else supposing it was a Pro…

Dismiss PV's analysis if you want. I do the same to some sources. But it's nonsense to discard a primary source, like that video, because it went through a particular person's hands. If hypothetically, ThinkProgress (who I do not trust) gets a hidden camera video of Trump talking about his dream of mass-expelling nonwhites from America, I wouldn't just pretend it didn't exist because ThinkProgress is the one who took…

I do not have the technical know-how to evaluate their claim that the video is unedited, nor have they earned the right to my time to validate it if I did. If the video is egregious enough, people with less mistrust than me will do the legwork, validate it, and will push it up the trust chain until I get it from a source I trust, which will say “this was originally leaked to PV, but we have done extensive checking and believe it is genuine.”

At which point, well, I still won’t be able to comment on it, but at least I’ll stop saying “dismiss this source out of hand.” :-)

(EDIT: small tweaks to spelling and phrasing.)

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

#436

Post by malvosenior »

afthonos wrote: post #420
malvosenior wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a really dangerous attitude to take. Are you really not curious what your own company is up to? Does it matter where the leak came from? How about this. Go to google.com and type the following: "women can" vs. "men can" The bias is clear as day and you don't need Project Veritas to tell you. There were also numerous documents leaked showing extreme left wing bias. You'll probably have seen them as an employee…

I can’t address the root point in public. You’ll have to take my word for it that I didn’t know what the point was at all when I wrote about sources (though of course, being sentient, I had an idea of the kind of point it would be). My attitude would be dangerous if Project Veritas were the only entity talking about the dangers of Google. But I find, opening a news tab, that everyone is deeply aware of Google’s reach…

Sadly the mainstream coverage of this issue is woefully lacking. Yes, everyone knows that Google is powerful and that's dangerous but you rarely see very explicit evidence of this and how they are biased. As much as it pains you, you probably should take the 5 minutes required to watch the actual footage. At least then you'll understand why Project Veritas isn't an important part of this story and why people are strongly disagreeing with your position. Jen Gennai's words definitely speak for themselves (as do the leaked documents).

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

#437

Post by CobrastanJorji »

19870213 wrote: post #360
emiliobumachar wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, this just flew over my head. What is this analogy about? Is Google DoS'ing third party websites? Deranking them? Suing for patent infringement? Who's W?

If you want to livestream on Youtube, you aren't allowed to mention or link to other livestreaming solutions, such as Twitch.

YouTube's policy appears to ban videos that "promise users they will see something but instead directs them off site in order to view." As far as I can tell, mentioning that you have a Twitch channel should be fine, but creating a video called "my sick game livestreaming" whose content is a guy telling you to go somewhere else to watch your sick livestreaming might be seen as this type of spam. Honestly, that sounds pretty reasonable to me. Maybe I'm missing a story somewhere about them doing something worse?

I think this is the policy here: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801973

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

#438

Post by NieDzejkob »

analognoise wrote: post #344
darkpuma wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only a fallacy if there is no demonstrable slope.

It's only a fallacy if you think YouTube owes anyone free platform access and to uphold free speech as a private entity. They don't.

It's not censorship by the definition used by law, no. It's still morally ambiguous...

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

#439

Post by qball »

harshreality wrote: post #357
ac29 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

But they are not instructionals on how to commit crimes. They are instructionals on how to bypass security systems, and that may or may not be a crime depending on your relationship with the entity controlling the security system. The same argument could be used to ban any videos showing weapons being used (target practice or demonstration dummies) or any martial arts. Because who knows whether viewers will use that…

>The same argument could be used to ban any videos showing weapons being used

That has actually already happened, to a certain extent (depends on the weapon). This is just the next step.

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

#440

Post by strictnein »

umvi wrote: post #52
r-s wrote: post #41

I dont understand this, if it can be bypassed, by definition, it is not secure?

As if there is any truly secure system on earth. Name a secure system.

Sending messages using One-time Pads are perfectly secure when used properly, which is pretty simple - don't reuse the keys and the message has to be shorter than the key you are using.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-time_pad

Post reply on HN