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

451–460 of 701 posts

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

#451

Post by unreal37 »

marcosdumay wrote: post #307
JTbane wrote: post #19

There's a fine line between pentesting education and "how to break into a computer", and it's sad that instructional videos are now being banned due to this policy.

Is there a line? I fail to see any difference. I also don't understand how a video teaching how to make your software more secure is different from a video teaching how to exploit insecure software. For all I know, they are the exact same video.

If I create a video that shows "how to hack into Facebook Corporation", that is teaching an illegal act. You do not have authorization to hack Facebook.

If you teach "how to hack your own system, that you own", that's a different thing entirely.

Two different videos.

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

#452

Post by loudmax »

analognoise wrote: post #430
loudmax wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The OS doesn't matter as much anymore. I disagree. Everything described above applies to the Microsoft Windows monopoly. The monopoly was shaken by the web, then by mobile in general, but lots of traditional businesses are still locked into the Windows stack. Non technical businesses in particular are locked into MS Office. Given that the world basically shrugged and let MS keep their stranglehold over the enterpri…

What if Microsoft was offering the best solutions to enterprise, and that's why they kept their stranglehold?

If solutions were independent of the environment, the fix would be easy: simply develop better software than Microsoft. Unfortunately Microsoft owns the stack so it's hard to compete with them on their turf. You can develop for Mac or Linux and sell to a tiny market. Or you can develop for Windows and hope Microsoft decides not to enter your market.

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

#453

Post by gambiting »

castis wrote: post #335
gambiting wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's probably a great way to get your own Google account banned, and there is no way in hell I'm risking that.

This is a good example of what people do in real life when confronted with change they want vs repercussions. Compounded by the fact that it was posted by username 'gambiting'.

I'm always curious what people think my username means. I thought of it when I was only starting to learn English at around age 10, and my young brain thought it would be amazing to combine "game" and "biting" (as in, eating games, since I loved playing them). I only discovered the word gambit much later.

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

#454

Post by otakucode »

jlmorton wrote: post #70

There's a lot of bad content on the Internet, and a lot of people wanted to ban it. And the free speech absolutists said, that's a slippery slope. Once you start restricting speech beyond whatever is illegal, there will be no end to the demands to ban certain content. And a lot of us said, slippery slopes are silly arguments. All we're asking is to ban overt racism and calls to violence. We can evaluate these things…

'Slippery slope' is an illogical way to argue things. There are better arguments against censorship, most notably: There is no cogent argument in favor of censorship. It's that simple. People don't like simple truth, but really, that's their problem. The fact of the matter is, there is exactly 1 person who can control the impact of any expression - the audience. No one else can do it. When the audience wishes to abdicate their responsibility to determine their response, and wish to pawn it off on the creator or anyone else, they have abandoned civilization.

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

#455

Post by flipcoder »

NieDzejkob wrote: post #438
analognoise wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

It's like how free speech is both a reference to the first amendment and a concept in and of itself, meaning that you can support free speech in private spaces, without supporting it as a requirement under law. There's always confusion over the difference between what should be allowed under law and how things should be ideally.

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

#456

Post by jlawson »

afthonos wrote: post #435
jlawson wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 an…

>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

The issue is that this can't happen because the sources you trust have decided that achieving their political goals (currently - getting rid of Trump) are more important than telling the truth. That's what this entire expose is about, in fact.

Obviously the sources you trust will not pass along information indicating that they are themselves untrustworthy.

When you offload your mental faculties to others, you become their pawn.

People have a duty to at least try to use their brain as an independent judging citizen. Help me, I can't stop these megacorps on my own...

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

#458

Post by wozniacki »

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.

Twitch gives you an outright ban if banned Twitch streamers are spotted anywhere on your stream -- whether or not it was intentional.

Lighter cases get 90 day suspensions of Twitch accounts.

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

#459

Post by thendrill »

mankeysee wrote: post #427
19870213 wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Doesn't Twitch have similar rules regarding not advertising other streaming sites? I mean, its reasonable trying not to give free advertisement for your competitors.

Is it reasonable?

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

#460

Post by unreal37 »

waiseristy wrote: post #21
unreal37 wrote: post #13

I know this might not be a popular opinion. But showing people how to hack systems... that seems like an OK thing to ban. It's a crime. Teaching people how to commit a crime has always been not OK.

I suppose teaching people how to paint would also not be okay, as those people might now graffiti some wall and commit a crime!!

I know it's just a throwaway comment, but you don't take a course on "learning to paint" to do vandalism.

You don't see courses on "ethical painting" like the person teaching it has to qualify that they're teaching the legal type of painting. You don't hear people talking about "white hack" and "black hat" painters.

I assume you know hacking has a huge illegal component such that it always has to be qualified as good or bad when talking about it.

Post reply on HN