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

YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 701 posts

Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

#641

Post by syshum »

notafraudster wrote: post #397
Liquix wrote: post #117

Emperor G built a beautiful walled city, inviting everyone in, encouraging them to paint their houses whatever color they like. A year later, Big G banned blue houses. If you didn't like the rules, you were more than welcome to build your house outside the city and paint it whatever color you like. Only most people don't leave - blue is just one color and they weren't very interested in it anyway. Besides, the city i…

Let me retell your story from my perspective. Some random guys built a beautiful walled city inviting everyone in, encouraging them to paint their houses whatever color they like. Before the walled city, almost everyone was homeless, and the few people who had houses were rickety and constantly needed upkeep. (Before YouTube, most people couldn't do video sharing, and tech-savvy people could but it was more complicat…

Authoritarian Censors always have a boogeyman to point to that justifies their censorship

Your white supremacists boogeyman is just a over blown justification for massive dictatorial censorship of the internet in general and you tube more specifically

I have no respect for anyone that wants to hide behind this narrative in support of the wide and sweeping censorship of millions of hours of contents

//as a side not, HOA's and Zoning laws are also Authoritarian, as a libertarian and supporter of individual freedom I do not support censorship, nor HOA's nor Zoning laws

Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

#644

Post by syshum »

jefftk wrote: post #587
apatters wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are other cities which you can move to. The problem is, Emperor G sells the only map to the Internet, and they're not shown on it.

Is your analogy trying to say that Google is the only search engine you can use, and that it doesn't list rival video sites? (Disclosure: I work for Google)

the Analogy to me is the Google run YouTube, Andriod and Search.

Google, it is believed and supported by much anecdotal evidence and some leaked documents, that google manipulates search to remove the "undesirable" competition like Minds, Gab, Bitchute, and others. Twitter, Facebook, and other Authoritarian Censorship supporting Silicon Valley companies are unaffected

Then there is Android where google blocks apps from anyone unless the adopt a censorship policy mirroring that of Google

Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

#645

Post by scoutt »

Liquix wrote: post #117

Emperor G built a beautiful walled city, inviting everyone in, encouraging them to paint their houses whatever color they like. A year later, Big G banned blue houses. If you didn't like the rules, you were more than welcome to build your house outside the city and paint it whatever color you like. Only most people don't leave - blue is just one color and they weren't very interested in it anyway. Besides, the city i…

I guess the lesson is "don't build your house in someone else's land".

Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

#646

Post by syshum »

mythrwy wrote: post #531
Liquix wrote: post #117

Emperor G built a beautiful walled city, inviting everyone in, encouraging them to paint their houses whatever color they like. A year later, Big G banned blue houses. If you didn't like the rules, you were more than welcome to build your house outside the city and paint it whatever color you like. Only most people don't leave - blue is just one color and they weren't very interested in it anyway. Besides, the city i…

Good analogy, but lets not forget Emperor G has to keep the Gods happy. Or at least the federal government(s) and to some extent the press and public. If he keeps allowing blue houses the few people who want blue houses are happy but the Gods may become angered. Given this, Emperor G's staff of highly paid lawyers have suggested cutting off the degenerates who want blue houses.

Emperor G will use his massive power to influence the elections of the Gods, only allows those sympathetic to the Emperor's goals a voice to talk to the people in the city

Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

#647

Post by dang »

Aelius wrote: post #294
whatshisface wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And there is no "who draws the line‽" argument here That's exactly the argument, not everybody thinks Alex Jones went too far. In fact, I bet a lot of people who listen to Alex Jones would find something you supported to be miles beyond what is ever OK. That's part and parcel of living in a diverse, cosmopolitan society. Sometimes, other people's opinions are miles beyond OK, but that's still okay. ;)

You seem to be willfully ignoring the demonstrable harm he causes. You're promoting a false balance. You're saying "Alex Jones robbed a bank, other people eat their coworkers' lunch, so who are we to judge?" Absolute nonsense.

Would you please not take HN threads further into flamewar?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

#648

Post by edanm »

Liquix wrote: post #117

Emperor G built a beautiful walled city, inviting everyone in, encouraging them to paint their houses whatever color they like. A year later, Big G banned blue houses. If you didn't like the rules, you were more than welcome to build your house outside the city and paint it whatever color you like. Only most people don't leave - blue is just one color and they weren't very interested in it anyway. Besides, the city i…

> In theory you are correct. In practice, if 97% of society exclusvely uses said aggregator/community to find videos - 97% of your potential audience will never know the video exists - is that not still censorship?

I mean... no?

I think it's useful to have a separate concept for actual censorship (government-mandated), and just "someone built a really great way to connect to a bunch of users, that didn't exist 20 years ago, but now isn't letting you use it". I'm not saying it's not problematic (or that it is), just that it's different in a meaningful way and therefore bad to conflate.

As for how much of a monopoly YouTube really is - it's clearly a huge aggregator that's gotten almost all "user watching video" engagement. Except other niches have been discussed here (e.g. porn), and they seem to be doing fine. So I don't think it's inevitable that YouTube is the only service that can exist.

Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

#649

Post by lucb1e »

A lot of people (especially here) would like to see more competition from non-Google platforms like Vimeo or others (currently they're so obscure, I can't even name any others), so not making too big a fuss about this and not getting it reverted might be a good thing because it forces people to go somewhere else with kids or IT security videos.

Re: YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems”

#650

Post by AmericanChopper »

wvenable wrote: post #639
AmericanChopper wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re still just describing the status quo, without acknowledging any of the issues I’ve articulated. This whole argument seems to run up against some of the values that HN would appear to hold most dearly. HN discussions around net neutrality would suggest that this community thinks it’s one of the most important tools for protecting a free internet. However this argument is arbitrarily applied only to specific com…

The problem I have with your argument is that your proposed solution is worse. And just because one holds a value most dearly doesn't mean that I'm willing to trample on the freedom of others to get it. Take your example: the community derides walled gardens. I personally dislike walled gardens and I move away from iPhones mainly because of that. There are plenty of ways that I feel that they're bad. But at the very…

Except this isn’t an accurate representation of what the alternative actually is, and it avoids acknowledging what the problems actually are.

> Is YouTube really going to be required to host every piece of video published to it forever?

This is a pretty blatant reductio ad absurdum. If YouTube want to clear out some of their content, they don’t have to exert editorial control to do so. Deleting every video that is more than 5 years old isn’t exerting editorial control. Deleting every video that isn’t earning $x/month arguably isn’t either. Deleting videos based on their content is.

If they decide what videos they want to host based on their content, they’re not a common carrier. They’re a publisher that is deciding what content they want to publish. Expecting them to take responsibility for that isn’t trampling their freedom.

The problem is that this situation has allowed a very small group to control most of the speech that takes place on the internet. They decide what content is published, and what content is not, and section 203 allows them to avoid all responsibility for publishing that content.

The Good Samaritan clause grants them with absolute editorial control over the content they host, and the rest of 203 ensures they don’t have to accept any responsibility for their editorial decisions. It is having your cake and eating it too, and the problems it creates are clear as day.

Post reply on HN