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

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

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 763 posts

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

#531

Post by maxlybbert »

vorpalhex wrote: post #522
maxlybbert wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I made the statement based on the facts that while there are roughly 200 million guns in the US, most gun owners have multiple guns (i.e., most people don’t own guns), and guns are far more popular in rural areas. When we lived in New Jersey, the leases specifically prohibited us from having guns in the house or apartment. According to https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-hou... , 42% of household…

I'm extremely skeptical of any stats around firearm counts, and ownership stats. Firearms aren't registered, which means the only data we have are the amount of background checks for buying them from a dealer (which goes through a department at the FBI called NICS). The issue is: + Those background checks are used for lots of things other than firearm purchases + Firearms can be transferred legally in some cases with…

Yes, I remember a friend showing me some rifles he had recently inherited, followed by the statement that as far as he knew they had never been registered and no matter how the law changed, they wouldn’t be registered while he owned them.

Still, bad numbers are all we’ve got. I’m sure most Americans have seen guns, or know gun owners, but I’m also sure most Americans — especially most urban Americans — don’t actually own guns themselves. If they did, people wouldn’t routinely confuse “semiautomatic” and “machine gun” or “submachine gun.”

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

#532

Post by wvenable »

humanrebar wrote: post #421
aninhumer wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People can advocate for social norms and different ethical frameworks without advocating for legal or regulatory changes. Yes, but unless you're considering some means of achieving those social norms, even if that's just social pressure, it's unlikely to change anything. And when people do actually advocate means of changing the norms of discourse, people who don't like the proposed changes will call it censorship.…

> "Freedom of Speech" is not actually a very coherent ideal. Sure it is. The ideal is that better ideas, not power, are the best response to ideas someone doesn't like. But there are certainly exceptions where power is needed to counter acutely harmful speech like "don't yell fire in a crowded theater" and "don't post stolen passwords". Governments and corporations just have different interests and different amounts…

> The ideal is that better ideas, not power, are the best response to ideas someone doesn't like.

Better ideas do not win -- ideas that are proclaimed the most or the loudest win. This is the problem we currently have.

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

#533

Post by leetcrew »

EasyTiger_ wrote: post #384

It's absolutely stunning what's happened to Reddit. Between the speech clampdowns like this and the soul-crushing amount of political astroturfing going on it's clearly time for a new challenger (not Voat).

why not voat?

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

#534

Post by CaptSpify »

grzm wrote: post #134
CaptSpify wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean most of the apps, like Maps, Email, GPS, etc. And I don't know the answer to that, because I haven't used an Apple product since the original iPhone. If I'm misunderstanding how they work, then, please, inform me as to what I'm missing. I'm very willing to admit I was mistaken if they don't work the way I think they do. I try to keep up with the basics of how they work, I have my friends show me things, etc. B…

Then perhaps dial back the anti-Apple rhetoric, or at least post something more substantial and thoughtful when you do. You’ve seen enough responses from people to anticipate objections. It’s tedious and boring to see the same arguments again and again. Mail is a mail client: if you use an Apple domain, you’ll use their servers. If not, then not. And you don’t need to use the built-in mail client. If you use Apple Ma…

> Then perhaps dial back the anti-Apple rhetoric, or at least post something more substantial and thoughtful when you do.

I don't have to be a mechanic to know when a car is broken, just like I don't have to know how all of Apple's software works to know that they don't actually value privacy. Please, prove me wrong. I'd love it if Apple actually put their money where their mouth is. Until then, I know enough about their stack to know that they don't build it in a way that ensures privacy.

> You’ve seen enough responses from people to anticipate objections.

And? I can anticipate objections as to any argument. That doesn't change the validity of either side. I don't think I get what you mean by this.

> It’s tedious and boring to see the same arguments again and again.

Once those arguments become invalid, I'll stop. If I'm saying something that isn't true, please point it out. Until then, I'll will proudly correct the lie that "Apple cares about privacy". I'm sorry that the truth is tedious to you, but there's not much that I can do about that.

> Mail is a mail client: if you use an Apple domain, you’ll use their servers. If not, then not. And you don’t need to use the built-in mail client. If you use Apple Maps, yeah, you’re using their service. You can use Google Maps or Waze or other alternatives if you choose. GPS is a radio: it doesn’t involve any service provider other than the satellites it receives information from, same as any other GPS radio.

But they could build their systems so that I don't have to go through Apple to use their app, just in the same way that email works. They choose not to. My point is that, until they design their systems so that I can use all of the standard functionality without going through their servers, they aren't taking privacy seriously.

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

#535

Post by CaptSpify »

Mononokay wrote: post #154
CaptSpify wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean most of the apps, like Maps, Email, GPS, etc. And I don't know the answer to that, because I haven't used an Apple product since the original iPhone. If I'm misunderstanding how they work, then, please, inform me as to what I'm missing. I'm very willing to admit I was mistaken if they don't work the way I think they do. I try to keep up with the basics of how they work, I have my friends show me things, etc. B…

You can sideload .IPAs. It's a bit inconvienient but it's better than nothing. If you're jailbroken, there's always Cydia, which is a Linux-like package manager.

Can I compile my own iOS or MacOS? Until then, it's all smoke and mirrors to me.

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

#536

Post by wu-ikkyu »

talmand wrote: post #513
wu-ikkyu wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The word censor comes from a Latin word for a government official who, well, censored things. Do you have a source for this? The latin word censere does not seem to be defined only as government officials silencing opinions they don't like: >Definitions:assess, count/reckon, decree, vote, determine, recommend think/suppose,judge http://latin-dictionary.net/definition/8896/censeo-censere-c... >Maybe you think the wor…

I've seen many people lately try to claim that censor is solely a government-related word and censorship is only something that government officials are capable of. Every definition of the word I've seen does not say this. Makes one wonder where this new definition is coming from?

>Makes one wonder where this new definition is coming from?

I suppose we shouldn't be surprised to see the euphemization of technology in a forum full of and run by technologists.

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

#537

Post by malnourish »

gnu8 wrote: post #428
this_user wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real reason for these new rules are the advertisers. The more objectionable content you have on your platform, the more difficult it becomes to attract them. Take 4chan as an example: For years they were struggling to find anyone who would want to advertise there, and that is not entirely surprising. Reddit is apparently also preparing an IPO in the foreseeable future. It would appear they are attempting to make…

I wonder how we can effectively punish Reddit for this. If we can cut into their advertising revenue and derail their IPO, that might force them to reverse their position.

Or the company might just die. If you want to "punish" them, use or create a different site.

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

#538

Post by CaptSpify »

walterbell wrote: post #137
CaptSpify wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can it work without any connections to apple? It's not just iCloud.

If you want to block all connections to Apple, configure an always-on VPN to intercept all network traffic, then use a firewall to stop all Apple connections. If you want to minimize connections to Apple, don't use Apple apps or services. Wire replaces iMessage. 2doapp replaces Notes.

And if Apple wanted to prove that they actually care about privacy, they would design their apps in a way that I wouldn't have to connect to their servers in any way. This is true even when talking about their apps and services.

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

#539

Post by Endy »

wu-ikkyu wrote: post #382
Endy wrote: post #261

So YouTube and Reddit are again saying that they're not okay with potentially illegal conduct on their platform. The only difference is that this time they're being much more direct and specific.

The documents from the Snowden leaks were illegally obtained/distributed. How long before that type of stuff is censored?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but at the same time, I don't think that likely the first place to release a major government leak is on YouTube or Reddit. There will always be some platform that's "freer" than some others, and there will always be some that are more moderated.

This may smack of censorship in some ways, and if it was a government agency, it certainly would be. Unfortunately, the core of the problem that a lot of people are dancing around is that we've come to expect private businesses on the Internet to care about anything other than their profits - but that's asking them to violate their corporate morality of "profit at all costs". They're not going to do that; we are either the customer or the product. This is those private companies forcing their moderation policies, so as to continue increasing their userbase and advertising income. Reddit and YouTube/Google are essentially moderated private platforms and if they decided that tomorrow all that could be posted on their sites are cat pictures, they would be well within their rights to do that.

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

#540

Post by wvenable »

MrMember wrote: post #445
Pinckney wrote: post #101

Amusingly, InRangeTV and C&RArsenal have both responded by using pornhub as an alternate distribution platform.

Pornhub has an opportunity here to branch out if they wanted to. They have the infrastructure, they could open a more general use, non-pornographic video hosting service.

If they're smart they'll stick to hosting stuff that is non-controversial: porn. There's no reason to get involved in deep political fights.
Post reply on HN