Live data from Hacker News

YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

tampafp.com

61–70 of 872 posts

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#61
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a channel produces a straight-news video that merely shows Trump making an unfounded election-related claim—perhaps during a speech, in an interview, or at a rally—YouTube would punish the channel as if the channel had made the claim, even if no one affiliated with the channel endorsed Trump's lies. Welcome to our new algorithmic future, brought to us by VCs and software engineering. Suppression of misinformatio…

>However building massively scaled platforms for information dissemination ensures that it will be done by robots with no judgement (either the machine kind, or poorly paid people following a script). The article makes it seem as if a human made the decision, not an algorithm. At the very least, humans came up with the policy and wrote the algorithms, and could override them if they wanted to.

> The article makes it seem as if a human made the decision, not an algorithm. At the very least, humans came up with the policy and wrote the algorithms, and could override them if they wanted to.

Yeah, but to do that you need a humans with judgement and time to think, and that's expensive. I wouldn't be surprised if Youtube's human moderators are paid on production, and quite separate from whoever's writing the policies they execute.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#63
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't recall the Women's March on DC storming the capitol in an effort to prevent ratification, but sure, if you define 'messed with' broadly enough, you will be 'technically correct'. In much the same way as dying of starvation can be technically described as 'missing a couple of meals'. The difference between the two sides is that one believes that the system works, but is unfair, and the other one believes nothi…

I mean the anti Vietnam war movement blew up a bomb in the Senate mail room in the Capitol on two separate occasions (and got a pardon from Bill Clinton 30 years later). Is storming worse than bombing?

No post body was provided.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#64
post #8

Quoted post unavailable.

For those of us who lived through the years of "selected not elected" it is a remarkable double standard. Or, being charitable, a remarkable reversal of opinion. (I tried to slip the expression "flip flop" in there as a joke since that was a popular and widely over-used term at the time too, but I couldn't make it work).

There's a huge difference: in Bush v. Gore, Gore stepped aside for the good of the country, choosing to respect the institution of the courts even if the decision was dodgy. Trump is willing to burn down the institutions if it gives him an edge. The danger from the Trump narrative is not that die-hards are still grumbling, it's that the candidate doesn't seem to care about anything beyond his own interests.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#65

Quoted post unavailable.

So anything that places any blame on the west is propaganda? So you think this Russia Ukraine conflict just started in 2022? These people aren't claiming that Putin did the right thing. They're just claiming that the US isn't completely innocent in all of this.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#66
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't recall the Women's March on DC storming the capitol in an effort to prevent ratification, but sure, if you define 'messed with' broadly enough, you will be 'technically correct'. In much the same way as dying of starvation can be technically described as 'missing a couple of meals'. The difference between the two sides is that one believes that the system works, but is unfair, and the other one believes nothi…

I mean the anti Vietnam war movement blew up a bomb in the Senate mail room in the Capitol on two separate occasions (and got a pardon from Bill Clinton 30 years later). Is storming worse than bombing?

I didn’t know about this - I’ll save people a search https://www.nytimes.com/1971/03/02/archives/bomb-in-capitol-...

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#67
Seems like the underlying problem is that YouTube is 1 generic platform that contains news, entertainment, random home videos, etc.

Perhaps the right answer is to “divide” it up and set requirements for each category of video, similar to how “YouTube kids” is a thing now. News and podcasts would go under its own section and have some level of sanity checks while home videos can be as random as they want to be.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#68

Quoted post unavailable.

I got this video recommended before the war became worldwide. I also got Ukraine propaganda unfortunately: "President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said the troops on Snake Island ‘died heroically’ " but a few days later we learned [0].

I would be cautious. On both sides.

[0] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10563487/Snake-Isla...

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#69
post #8

Quoted post unavailable.

Hillary has been claiming the 2016 election was stolen by Russia for Trump for six years now, and nobody seems to fret about how she’s undermining democracy. There were even many faithless electors that tried to overturn the results. Much like Trump, she just can’t seem to admit she lost.

Both parties need to learn that if you lose it’s because you didn’t get enough votes and to reflect on why that is. Although I’m sure it’s a lot more fun to complain about how you were cheated.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious about where you see an institutionalized support on the left for election tampering claims, if you have any sources.

Quoted post unavailable.

What is the falsifiable hypothesis of the stolen election? There's nothing coherent about an ever evolving list of grievances. I'm convinced this is by design. If there were a sound theory, it could be disproven. But if its just a nebulous collection of disjointed complaints, the wound can stay open forever, which is the actual goal.
Post reply on HN