Live data from Hacker News

The Big [Censored] Theory

pudding.cool

621–630 of 891 posts

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#621

It's worth noting that American censorship in, say, 1960, was at close to the same level. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_censorship_in_the_United_...

Did the article imply somewhere that China is unique in it's censorship? I personally tire of this pattern: 1. Article submitted to an international forum about X country doing Y bad thing 2. "Well the USA is just as bad, they also did/doing/will do Y bad thing" Well yes, that is true, but people are voting up the submission because they found that X-doing-Y-today was interesting and don't care to rehash the history…

1. Article submitted to an international forum about X country doing Y bad thing 2. "Well the USA is just as bad, they also did/doing/will do Y bad thing"

Jeesh - many reader of hn are in the US and if X interesting is happen elsewhere, they are reasonably interested that X is happening in the US. Also, many hn readers are India, they may describe X happening in India also. And notably, censorship in India is noted in a different post that seems properly to be getting attention as well.

And, of course, American censorship deserves mention because the USA has often presented as bastion of free speech. Just as much, something like a "feeling of freedom" is a big export of the US - in the sense that it's media products give people in more traditional societies that sensation. This was a big motivation of the original article after all.

Not all American media products are pro-American propaganda. Some are even anti-American. But the overlap/gray-area is significant and so the qualities of the USA aren't irrelevant to say the least.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe this format would help Q: How exactly was it censored, and how is it comparable to censorship in China? A: https://nypost.com/2021/07/15/white-house-flagging-posts-for... That is censorship, because social media then bans (censors) those users and the discussion. Which was my exact point. What do they do in China: “hey this snippet here looks like misinformation” then the company removes that snippet. They exte…

Maybe I should remind you of the actual words in the gp comment. > Let's take your first point for example. If I go on Fox News right now and search for articles about the 2020 election being stolen, I get plenty of articles and opinions talking about it. How exactly was it censored, and how is it comparable to censorship in China? You have conveniently pivoted to a straw man argument about Covid-19 which was not men…

1. The primary discussion was around "how was censorship related to China" and the poster gave a random example from my arbitrary list. I responded with an arbitrary example, but still giving an example how censorship is comparable to China.

2. My position has never been the government has to be doing the censorship. People censor, some in media, some in social media, some on HN, some in government, etc.

3. Censorship doesn't mean you cannot reach data; it's a suppression of speech (which Zuckerberg, Dorsey, and Youtube admitted to censoring publicly). https://www.britannica.com/topic/censorship

> censorship, the changing or the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive of the common good. It occurs in all manifestations of authority to some degree, but in modern times it has been of special importance in its relation to government and the rule of law.

4. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/did-social-media-actua...

> Ahead of the election, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube promised to clamp down on election misinformation, including unsubstantiated charges of fraud and premature declarations of victory by candidates. And they mostly did just that — though not without a few hiccups.

They have been open about censoring since before the election. Now, if we want to get into government, the FBI interfered by (1) strongly suggesting social media to "limit" (censor) information; and ironically (2) accused of not investigating or sharing relevant information about the candidates (https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/7CD44E16-BF...)

5. I know many people banned from social media. They can't post on any accounts. I also followed many people I didn't know personally banned. If you ask questions / discuss certain topics you will be removed; typically for sharing particular pieces of content.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are just a handful off the top of my head… https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BN3PIGLDscQ https://twitter.com/alexberenson/status/1558060844549902338 https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/FACEBO... https://nypost.com/2021/07/16/government-dictating-what-soci... I can keep going, but most of those people who are impacted you don’t hear from due to censorship.

Always funny when people link to publicly available content in order to demonstrate that it is being censored.

Censorship doesn't mean you cannot reach data; it's a suppression of speech (which Zuckerberg, Dorsey, and Youtube admitted to censoring publicly). https://www.britannica.com/topic/censorship

> censorship, the changing or the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive of the common good. It occurs in all manifestations of authority to some degree, but in modern times it has been of special importance in its relation to government and the rule of law.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lack confidence with women Aren't all the male characters in the show this way? Is the show doing "Character who is Indian male lacks confidence with women" ? Or is it doing "Character lacks confidence with women because he's an Indian male" ? There's a world of difference.

Asian men historically have been desexualized. The show is relying on that stereotype. https://youtu.be/2k82hIqd1Os

In the episode mentioned in article (Series 3, Ep 21), Raj gets the girl in the end. Leonard and Howard miss out.

Raj embraces the role-playing sex game with scientist woman. The scene fades out implying they have a night of sex and wine.

Where exactly is your "desexualisation"?

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#625
post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really a "logical extreme", that's a straw man and an obvious ploy to do something you're not supposed to be able to do. I think a reasonable person would see that what you describe is an attempt to make an end run around both the spirit and letter of the law. But what VidAngel was doing was "one copy = one view", which is IMO entirely reasonable. There is zero moral difference between mailing someone a Bl…

The difference is when mailing it, it gets worn out, so after a certain number of plays the renter needs to buy a new copy. If it's fine digitally it never gets worn out.

That doesn’t matter since you are allowed to copy your own digital media for the purpose of dealing with that exact situation. A rental shop would legally be allowed to make a backup copy of every disc they have in case it gets damaged.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#626
post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is when mailing it, it gets worn out, so after a certain number of plays the renter needs to buy a new copy. If it's fine digitally it never gets worn out.

That doesn’t matter since you are allowed to copy your own digital media for the purpose of dealing with that exact situation. A rental shop would legally be allowed to make a backup copy of every disc they have in case it gets damaged.

Hmm, are they allowed to rent out the backup copy if the original breaks? I thought rental was based on first sale doctrine and backup copies are based on fair use. I'm not sure if you can combine the 2.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#627
post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is really relevant. This isn't about logic or about programming, it's about trying to conform to the spirit of what the law says, and the intent behind it. The idea of copyright is "when you reproduce something, the creator should get a cut". Sure, we can argue all day what counts as a "copy" when it comes to computers, but... c'mon. One Bluray disc is bought, and one person gets to watch it. When…

This seems to be equating copying with performance. They're not the same thing, and for most artists in recorded media, it's performance royalties that generate their primary income. If you wanna change that, find some other way to compensate artists first. They are the value creator. Attacking the bloated middlemen in the delivery chain doesn't remove the need for creators to eat. That is VidAngel's moral failure, a…

Confusing copying and performance doesn’t matter to this argument because whether or not you consider lending a book copying or performance lending a digital book should work by the same rules.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#628

I can see how this might backfire. You notice a censored jump and start to feel the itch of curiosity as to what it concealed. I had to watch several of the censored scenes whereas I would have never just randomly watched clips of the show. Also, love the presentation on this page.

We (the HN crowd, often living in less-censored societies) would be very curious. I’d like to know how curious this would make non-HN people, and those living in more censored places. My assumption is that they take it for granted and just continue to watch the show. It might be hard for them to even find the uncensored clips.

Growing up in Sweden, I mainly watched Swedish (original or dubbed) shows as a kid.

Once we got satellite and I started watching American channels I had my first encounter with censorship. Bleeps and blurs and random spots where audio cuts out. It was very jarring. I couldn't understand it at all and still can't. It really stands out, breaks the flow, makes everything feel cheap and ugly. In real life people swear and sometimes there is nudity. That never bothered me. But the jarring edits "protecting" me from these? Those certainly do.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I have a question for someone very interested in freedom of speech and censorship. We know that geopolitical adversaries weaponize narratives to cause destabilization of the body politic of other nations. We know that the internet and social media have exploded in popularity in the last 20 years, giving 'foreign actors' unprecedented access to citizens. What should a government of a 'free' nation do to counter that d…

> What should a government of a 'free' nation do to counter that destabilization or those weaponized narratives?

Start to teach logical fallacies in primary schools. Encourage critical thinking. This comes at the cost that the government's own bs does not work so well anymore, because people now know how to spot a logical fallacy.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is more extreme in China than in America. In addition to sex, lgbt, and other things of a similar nature, movies with magic are especially rejected. Ever notice how movies seem to be getting more bland and milk/toast each year? its because there is a lot of money in China, and China only accepts a few foreign movies each year. Disney, Warner Bros, etc. all want a slice of that pie so they comply with Chinese censo…

> milk/toast FYI the word I believe you're looking for is "milquetoast" :)

Milk/toast somehow also captures the essence of it.
Post reply on HN