This is a logical fallacy. How can you bypass a truly secure system? By definition if you can bypass it then it's not secure, is it?
YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
461–470 of 701 posts
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#462There'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…
I don't think this changes the idea that the slippery slope is a silly argument. Aren't we evaluating these things on their own terms now? It's definitely possible to have a YouTube that is harsh on calls to violence but allows cyber-security instructionals. We're not sliding down the slope just yet. We took a step too low and need to climb back up. edit: I should not have used "we" above, since only Alphabet control…
It is possible to have a Youtube like this. Its also possible to have a Youtube that allows porn, or a Youtube that exclusively hosts videos from large media companies because its too risky to allow random people to upload any of these things.
All of these are possibilities. Some of them are more likely than others. But you want to know the least likely possibility? The one with chances so unrealistically impossible that it practically will not happen? Its the possibility that Moderation will land on the point in the Gray Area that you believe is Fair.
Why is that? Its because everyone's point is different, and its insanely difficult to even define that point during day-to-day enforcement. So, Youtube, serving millions of users, having thousands of humans and millions of lines of code running enforcement, will continually become more conservative. Someone is outraged? Ban it. An advertiser is outraged? Oh damn, make a policy. Making a policy is easy. Reverting is is very difficult. At its very foundations this is why the world gets more and more conservative over time.
This is why freedom of speech is such an important thing. The first, best option is to find a gray area that is perfect for everyone... which is impossible. The second best option is to allow anything. Anything is better than nothing, and its also probably better than the conservative, whitewashed world that we're headed toward.
But, then again; they can run their platform however they want. And most people think they should ban violence... and self-harm... and suicide... and directions for making explosives... and hacking? Well, maybe there is somewhere they should stop. No one ever said it was easy. Or that allowing everything is the right move for them. But, the reality is, if they keep changing the rules, then the rules will eventually slide toward gross conservatism. That's the future of the platform. And next decade, a new platform will replace them, and the same thing will happen to them. Freedom of speech isn't necessary in private platforms like this; generally speaking, given enough time, the markets will take care of it.
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#463Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that how most home door locks work, though? Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water here, it's pretty helpful to have legal deterrents to amoral actions...
> Isn't that how most home door locks work, though? Not at all. Short of building a fortress, you won't stop someone determined to get inside, but you can make it sufficiently difficult that they're more likely to be noticed, or more likely to seek out an easier alternative. > it's pretty helpful to have legal deterrents to amoral actions... Nobody is suggesting otherwise; rather, the issue is that legislating agains…
Wait, "Not at all"? Yes, it very much is, what you just said is literally the explanation I would give if someone asked me to explain why a front door lock is a legislative protection, not an actual security feature...
Legislation meaning you don't need to defend against it is actually quite real in meat space (and quite effective), so pretending like it's universally a bad idea is incongruous with your own facts.
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#464Oh, thank goodness.
I consume a relatively large amount of such content, and I can read twenty good articles in the time it takes to watch one video.
Do you think I can get them to ban video game walkthroughs?
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#465You want YouTube to be one way, but it's the other way. Protest. Boycott. Build alternatives. This is how you fight corrupt corporations. It makes no sense to force YouTube to host all content for free. YouTube is a video entertainment business, it's not insulin or a house. Again, it's a video entertainment site. It is wholly unimportant in reality. The only power YouTube has is the power society willingly gives it b…
Is that a Wire reference <3
:) I wish it were more relevant (YouTube is like Marlo somehow), but I just like the quote lol.
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#466Earlier quoted context omitted.
Neither TV nor radio quite fits the analogy... because these are broadcast 1:many mediums. And the idea that no one has a right to have their message amplified to millions is sort of insidious and evil. Because the consumers choose what to watch on YouTube. And the users produce the content. So this more like a virtual community with billions of micro-interactions. Of course it scales. The internet is a testiment to…
> And the idea that no one has a right to have their message amplified to millions is sort of insidious and evil. So I should have the right to force a private company to broadcast my message? Free of charge? People can host their content on other platforms if Youtube isn't working for them.
If that private company has a monopoly like youtube does, they should absolutely be forced to carry your message.
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#467I 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.
Most Constitution-respecting Americans will disagree. Committing a crime is not OK. Conveying information for learning is always OK.
Really?
"It shall be unlawful for any person... to teach or demonstrate the making or use of an explosive, a destructive device, or a weapon of mass destruction..."[1]
Teaching bomb making is not legal. Passed the senate 94-0, no objections. There are things you can't teach.
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#468Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are alternatives. For years I've been following content creators who upload their content to multiple services because they saw the writing on the wall. Bitchute: https://www.dailymotion.com/us Dailymotion: https://www.dailymotion.com/us PeerTube: https://joinpeertube.org/
Some of the banned/demonetized firearms videos have also moved on to sites like Full30 and pornhub
The reported move to pornhub was pretty much just a one-time PR stunt to get some media attention for the issue (it worked.) Full30 seems to be taking a serious shot at it though.
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#469Does 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…
Next up, banning video tutorials on how to use youtube-dl.
Shh, don't give them ideas.
Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”
#470Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Without a full stack you're just a Jenga tower.
Deeper!