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

YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 983 posts

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#521

Post by danudey »

adnzzzzZ wrote: post #101
renewiltord wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a free society. If you don't like someone else's house party, build your own. thedonald.win is one such thing.

That is an increasingly cynical view to expose given that the people who decide to do that just get blacklisted by the financial elite. https://twitter.com/TheEbonyMaw/status/1277120076186112000 , https://reclaimthenet.org/gab-andrew-torba-visa-blacklisted-...

Sounds like the majority of society is against the kind of hate and violence these people cheer for, and companies don't want to be associated with it. Is this not capitalism working as intended?

If Visa won't let you fund your hate speech, then I guess go find someone who will. If no one is willing, maybe that says more about you than about them.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#522

Post by chrischattin »

nradov wrote: post #136
rickbutton wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? There is a massive political movement for racial equality happening all over the country. They are responding to pressure from consumers, which they very much should, because all of these companies have ignored these issues for decades. They aren't coordinating with each other in some conspiracy to silence white supremacists. The -people- want white supremacists to be deplatformed (a good thing!).

The pressure is more directly from advertisers. Major consumer brands don't want their advertisements appearing next to objectionable user generated content.

It could also be coming from investors. Tencent owns a major chunk of Reddit now.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#523

Post by empath75 »

skinkestek wrote: post #445
cjslep wrote: post #254

When I, a white young boy, grew up in The South and saw the Klan, my father taught me to never do business with them, never enable their behavior, never let their organization rent rooms from venues I may own, and to decline all of their business even if they were paying extra to be your customer. For as long as he could remember, and his father before him, the Klan and other fringe organizations would always cry and…

> It is a win for the far-right to have y'all here on HN "disagree with them but still believe they should be here and not on the fringe". Just FTR we are pretty far from accepting the far right here on HN: tptacek shared some interesting research he'd done a couple of hours ago and it might be of interest to everyone here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23681929

People reliably will come out to defend white nationalists in every topic it comes up here. And people denouncing white nationalists will be voted down.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#524

Post by manfredo »

masklinn wrote: post #120
ars wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you are watching, but I have never been funneled to anything even remotely like that. YT sends you videos based on your watch history. If you watch hate videos to see what kind of stuff people are saying then you should delete them from your history to avoid YT finding you more.

Multiple experiments have demonstrated that as you follow recommendations it drives you more and more towards extreme content. If you don’t follow recs it obviously has no “drive” to keep you on as you’re not following the journey. Basically the recommendations system always tries to drive you towards slightly more “engaging” content. Zeynep Tufekci, amongst others, published about it back in 2018.

Can you link to Tufekci's research? I can only find the NYTimes op-ed. Furthermore it's worth nothing that other studies determined the opposite, YouTube disproportionately recommends left leaning content: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1912.11211.pdf

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#525

Post by IkmoIkmo »

qez wrote: post #230
howmayiannoyyou wrote: post #186

Molyneux earned the ban. I've personally reported him several times. Not to say the other didn't also deserve it, but Molyneux was on my radar.

What did he do to deserve a ban?

> https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux

Stuff like:

> The Left is infested with pedophiles - they promote the welfare state and feminism in order to get protective fathers out of the home, so they have easier sexual access to the children of single mothers.

> The primary purpose of feminism is to lower white birthrates.

You can have freedom of speech, just do it on your own platform if you want to say such nonsense. Makes sense to me that a mainstream commercial platform like Youtube with normal community guidelines wouldn't allow this stuff.

I mean, there's some de facto holocaust apologetics in there, some stuff about arabs being too low IQ to accept the US bringing democracy through invasion, some stuff about the 2008 financial crisis being caused by minorities having too low an IQ etc etc. It's all pretty sad. Not everyone deserves a platform with extremely-cheap infrastructure to reach hundreds of millions of people like on Youtube with a message like this, easily ban-worthy if you ask me.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#526

Post by searchableguy »

sixstringtheory wrote: post #469
searchableguy wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you don't like the counterarguments you're encountering here, you should consider that Gab feels the same way I am genuinely curious why you are trying to divert my initial point into a different direction here. I gave an example of gabe to illustrate that there needs to be some hard point for private companies to be responsible or adhere strictly to the legality or public. Visa isn't a small private business th…

I don't mean to divert. Allow me to try to summarize: You: Gab can't use Visa (A) for reasons, it's not reasonable to suggest that (B) a competitor be built Gab: we can kick you off (A') for reasons, you can always spin up a Gab instance to run yourself (B') What is the difference between A and A', and B and B'?

I already explained that. Building an alternative to gab isn't hard. Building alternatives to visa is a bar beyond average people or group of them. I can spin up an instance of mastodon within few minutes. I can't do the same for visa. I can't do the same for google cloud, cloudflare or any of the other monoliths.

This isn't applicable to all the situations but it is one of the factor differentiating gab from visa.

Another is the reach. If gab has the same number of users as youtube, then they should have something to let the public have a choice in what happens on the platform. I don't know where to define the user scale though. it's a hard problem. At 1 billion? Maybe when 90% of the country uses it?

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#528

Post by zo1 »

gambiting wrote: post #456
bassman9000 wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this sarcasm? Because I can give you a couple examples of well documented, savage, systemic oppression of white people. Are you one of those that thinks history begins in the US 250 years ago?

Even if it did, he's forgetting that US was incredibly racist towards the Irish, and they are as white as they come. Racism is racism, no matter who does it towards whom.

This is the crux of it and why a lot of people logically follow the middle ground such as All Lives Matter and would do so more of it weren't so viciously attacked. As soon as you get into this messy game of "but they did that to this group" and "those others did that only after this group did that thing", etc you're in a spaghetti mess and there is no way of untangling it.

We're witnessing an entirely new oppressed class of people being created right before our eyes in slow motion. When we realize that as a society, we'll have added another layer of complexity and the cycle will be even more difficult to fix.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#529

Post by akvadrako »

madballster wrote: post #310

A year or two ago, Canadian conservative professor and YT superstar Jordan Peterson announced he was going to free conservative and "alternative content producers" from the yoke of Valley owned online media companies by creating his own, conservative media platform. What ever happened to this? Vaporware? It appears conservative content creators knew their days were counted on advertising-financed mainstream media out…

He did create it, but I haven't seen anything of value on there:

https://www.thinkspot.com/

JP has also been out of the picture for the past year or so.

I think the main issue is most conservatives just aren't interested in a siloed forum; the whole point in commenting is to convince others.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#530

Post by JPKab »

__turbobrew__ wrote: post #457
gguevaraa wrote: post #246

Christ, spez is getting hammered in the announcements. I mean seriously, he's basically saying it's alright to be discriminatory against the "majority", whatever that means. Dude doesn't even clarify what that means, just skirts around the question. Lot of people are wondering why r/BlackPeopleTwitter or r/politics haven't been banned despite blatant racism or calls to violence. People are pretty pissed at spez, to s…

You literally have to send a picture of your black skin to the mods of r/BlackPeopleTwitter in order to be added to the country club. Imagine a subreddit forcing people to send pictures of their white skin to the mods. People would be outraged. The only good way to use reddit these days is to unsubscribe from all of the default subreddits and only subscribe to small subreddits dedicated to your hobbies/interests. Eve…

"You literally have to send a picture of your black skin to the mods of r/BlackPeopleTwitter in order to be added to the country club."

Is this really true? I quit Reddit years ago, even though some of the tech specific subs were awesome. Just couldn't stand supporting a site where the mods were so abusive. I remember the tipping point was a guy on there talking about "Foundational Black Americans", and essentially shitting on recent African immigrants as being second tier to black Americans descended from slaves. It was so vile, and they did nothing about it. He was bullying a second generation Nigerian American about her political beliefs. The mods told me it wasn't hateful to attack someone for their parent's national origin. Which is patently absurd.

The same guy also basically stated that any human who is descended from people who came to the US voluntarily is "white", no matter their ehnicity. It was shocking they allowed this kind of bullying. Ethno-nationalism is horrifying to me.

Post reply on HN