YouTube and Reddit roll out new restrictions including channel and sub bans • Hacker News Board

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

#481

Post by zbentley » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:42 PM UTC

themaninthedark wrote: post #470

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 A lot of historical content will be lost.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…

Also look at the timing of it: They did this when the people most likely to object are both preoccupied with Faceboook and Mark Zuckerburgs statement as well as the Count Dankula trial verdict. Looks to me like they don't want scrutiny.

Doesn't that argument apply universally?

Whenever something happens, people can point to whatever was on the headlines during the last week and say "see, they're trying to sneak in while everyone's preoccupied with this!"

Unless we're talking, like, 9/11-level media preoccupation, I don't put much stock in claims like this.

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

#482

Post by lettergram » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:42 PM UTC

FRex wrote: post #418

saas_co_de wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's why countries where gun are banned for general population, does not have mass murder by "common people" like USA Sorry, but this is completely false. I am not going to link to it for reasons of taste, but you can google "encyclopedia dramatica high score" for a very thorough run down on mass shootings. They occur globally and are by no means a phenomenon isolated to the US.

First of all, ED seems overly focused on USA/West/China, it doesn't list several arson (I assume that's what Fire Emblem means) and stabbing events (Hack'n'Slash) I personally know of. Next, I'm assuming that by "mass shootings" you mean the FPS, Single Player category on there (since the only other FPS aka shootings category is Co-op Mode which seems to be almost exclusively terrorism and gangs, not "common people")…

That's because we allow our citizens to have guns, which by default heavily skew the stats...

Perhaps I should just publish some results. Seriously, every time I debate a data scientist I just send them to the data. Heat correlates more with mass murder than anything... Like I don't really get it.

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

#483

Post by mattbrewsbytes » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:43 PM UTC

latencyloser wrote: post #444

mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At one point (1920 I think) there was an amendment which made alcohol illegal. It went on for 13 years and then was removed. So there is a legal framework to add/remove amendments from the US Constitution, they are amendments after all, they were not there originally (I think 3 years after).

It was removed, but also (and maybe because) it was nearly impossible to effectively enforce. Gun restrictions would very much experience the same problems. There are millions of guns and gun owners in the US and many of those people are firm believers in their right to own a gun. They'd likely bury them in the yard or, as the old joke goes, "lose" them in a boating accident, before turning them over to authorities.…

I didn't really comment on if it was enforceable, just that in a logical manner there is a path for amendments to be removed, added or changed.

Doing minimal research on prohibition since I had no context into what triggered it: "Prohibition also united progressives and revivalists. The temperance movement had popularized the belief that alcohol was the major cause of most personal and social problems and prohibition was seen as the solution to the nation's poverty, crime, violence, and other ills." [0]

You could replace alcohol with firearms and the part about removing them being "solution to the nation's poverty, crime, violence, and other ills". I bet there are a lot of people that would believe that prohibiting firearms would help solve those issues.

Just because laws are not easy to enforce doesn't mean they can't happen. There are still counties in some states that are 'dry'.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_Stat...

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

#484

Post by Frondo » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:45 PM UTC

purple-again wrote: post #388

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't think trying to murder policemen because your country enacted gun controls to protect schoolchildren would be "nutters trying to shoot people"? "Oh but I need this 1000 round per minute gun for pest control in my apartment! I'll murder people to protect my right to have it."??

Why do you think I will be shooting policemen? That’s hilarious buddy, my best friend was an officer before becoming a fed and two of my uncles are officers. All three will be shooting the same direction as me and the rest of our families. Thank you for helping me to underline for you how little you understand the situation.

It isn't clear who you're threatening to shoot. All you've said is "There is an organized group of citizens ready to carry out extrajudicial killings if gun laws change."

To the rest of us, that sounds like the violence threatened by a terrorist group--and maybe you shoot policemen, maybe you shoot your neighbors, I dunno, I'm not the one talking about keeping my guns around to be able to shoot my fellow citizens.

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

#485

Post by DuskStar » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:46 PM UTC

pasquinelli wrote: post #226

nbdev wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the part where I mentioned Vietnam, and the part where I asked what if half the military defects? I'm against loss of human life too, that's why I'm pro-2nd Amendment. People can defend themselves. People can fight off tyranny. Given enough time, people will need to do that again.

what if half the military and all the gun nuts decide this country is for whites only? the people can fight for tyrrant as well as against it.

Well, that would be why we have an amendment to the constitution that says 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.' As long as we follow that, guns won't be whites only.

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

#486

Post by intopieces » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:47 PM UTC

juliangoldsmith wrote: post #447

dangoor wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

People can theoretically switch from one social network to another, however taking their friends with them is less easy. If you make your living making videos on YouTube, and want to move to another service, most of your audience isn't going to come along. Being able to publicly post your videos is pointless if nobody watches them.

>Being able to publicly post your videos is pointless if nobody watches them

The freedom of speech is not the freedom to be heard. Youtube is not the only seller of megaphones by the public square.

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

#487

Post by Klathmon » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:48 PM UTC

chillwaves wrote: post #472

Klathmon wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and those things are (in my opinion) regulated proportionally to their "level of danger". You can't anonymously own a car in the US, you can't (legally) buy one at a car convention then take it on the road without registering it. Larger knives have regulations and rules around who can buy them, and some are just illegal to own in many states. Tequila requires you to be over a certain age, and you can't buy it if…

One sticking point is gun owners seem completely unwilling to budge on any kind of gun registry -- which seems like a necessary starting point for any kind of accountability of ownership and an actual effective solution against straw purchases and illegal gun sales. Just putting this out here because I like how thoughtful your posts are and I am really stumped at finding a compromise -- ultimately I think there is no…

That's what really sucks. For various reasons a gun registry will never really happen. It's too controversial due to America's past and founding.

I'm pretty sure that means we will either continue the path we are on now (which makes things "about" guns illegal, without making guns illegal or registering them), or we will leapfrog the registry and just outright ban most models or types or people from owning them.

Like you said many gun owners are letting perfect be the enemy of good here, and are unwilling to compromise on something that will allow them to keep guns for sport and self-defense in some situations. And that's going to lead to pressure building up to the point that their complains aren't going to matter, then they won't be listened to at all while the avalanche falls removing most or all gun rights.

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

#488

Post by bnolsen » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:48 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #415

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.

It's never going to be en masse. Australia enacted sufficient gun control to drastically limit mass shootings by introducing licensing, purpose and registration requirements as well as banning semi-automatics. There was a buyback scheme which most people complied with. I do wonder if American resistance to sensible gun control will cause a flip straight over into hard restrictions, but it's difficult to see what the…

"sensible"? Since massive amoutns of guns have found their way to the public since the 1990s the crime rates across the US have been dropping dramatically. And even so the US isn't even close to the top of the list worldwide in per capita murder rate even though lots of people have weapons.

If anything those numbers show that there is at the very least no correlation between numbers of guns and crime, and may well indicate more guns means less crime. Since the US constitution protects ownership with the "shall not be infringed" clause and the stats show there's little downsides why stomp on people's rights?

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

#489

Post by humanrebar » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:48 PM UTC

yequalsx wrote: post #446

humanrebar wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To complete the thought experiment, what would we have to do to form our own militia? Have a charter and elections? The colonial army at the time was not sanctioned by the king to bear the arms it did.

My interpretation of the second amendment is that the government has broad regulatory powers when it comes to gun ownership. Furthermore that the right applies only to militias and that in the present day militia would be an organization under government control. Times change and interpretations change. I do not feel bound to interpret the Constitution by only considering what the founders meant. But for people who a…

> I do not feel bound to interpret the Constitution by only considering what the founders meant.

That's probably the place to end this back-and-forth. We aren't going to hash out "rule by men" versus "rule of law" a thread about banned subreddits. But I think the right way to be unbound from what the Constitution means is to actually convince people to amend it. There are significant justice implications to ignoring the laws of a country in service of realpolitik.

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

#490

Post by jasonkostempski » Thu, Mar 22, 2018, 2:49 PM UTC

domevent wrote: post #96

driverdan wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? I can see some objection to Nazis but what's your issue with the other topics?

I used to run some irc channels back in the early 90’s, and they were true free for all’s. We had a lot of ftp’s, a lot of anonymous users, and it was a full time job keeping it clear of child pornography. Let me tell you, it takes something out of you when you see that stuff, and it’s something you don’t get back. We weren’t even aiming for a free speech utopia, but we were unregulated and that was enough. That kind…

What about a forum where only text is allowed?