YouTube takes down independent court livestreams • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#641

Post by NoPie » Sat, Nov 20, 2021, 7:40 AM UTC

thepasswordis wrote: post #11

I think at this point we can just expect this stuff. The ridiculousness of it, though. The rekieta law stream (which is fantastic , btw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7YXd2M5E-8 ) has anywhere from 4-12 active lawyers giving commentary and context to everything that is happening. This is exactly the type of thing we dreamed about when we were first creating the internet. However: often times these smaller independ…

It is strange to see all submissions about Kyle Rittenhouse here disappear very quickly. I just thought that if more or less randomly selected 12 jury members agreed that he was innocent then what most people really think and what the media portraits it to be are very different things.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#642

Post by SpelingBeeChamp » Sun, Nov 21, 2021, 12:39 PM UTC

raxxorrax wrote: post #561

prince005 wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very sad to see how people blame and thrash services like youtube instead of respecting the fact that all of it is provided absolutely free of cost.

Youtube gets their content free of costs and sometimes they ban that content like these live streams. I think banning something is a pretty decisive form of criticism.

Not from me they don't. If they stopped paying me, I would stop creating content. The same is true for every other successful YouTuber I know who is out there creating high-quality content.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#643

Post by arminiusreturns » Tue, Nov 23, 2021, 9:26 AM UTC

AussieWog93 wrote: post #618

arminiusreturns wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you expound on what you mean? I must have missed it.

He made the point that religious organisations tried to restrict freedom of speech in order to silence activist groups they didn't agree with (which at the time was true), but also suggested a causal relationship between the fact that they held "primitive" beliefs and their willingness to censor. If you look at how society has evolved over the last 15 years, the opposite has come true. Activists are successfully limi…

Actually I think I could deny it, because the issue is more complex than a boolean. While yes, certain religions have increased in their freedom of speech rhetoric, some of them still have death penalties for things like blasphemy (which in some cases includes cartoon drawings, apparently), and that hasn't really changed.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#644

Post by politician » Tue, Nov 23, 2021, 2:33 PM UTC

politician wrote: post #4

Dry run for when the verdict is announced.

I wanted to come back to this prediction and note that the stream was not interrupted during or after the verdict.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#645

Post by ViViDboarder » Sun, Nov 28, 2021, 4:55 AM UTC

lucaspm98 wrote: post #462

ViViDboarder wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do understand that COVID was new to everyone and, as such, new information has been learned as we’ve progressed through this pandemic that has caused a shift in course? It doesn’t have to be because of a conspiracy for new information to direct in a different way. In fact, if despite new information we didn’t adjust, that’d be just plain regressive.

The main problem is changing recommendations without new information, just a new politically driven "right-think." Also, there were several shifts in course that directly contradicted science but virtue signaled the right message at the time. It's very hard to build trust in the government, and once it's lost even the most reasonable requests will be questioned. A relevant comment I saved but no longer have the sourc…

Those _are_ due to new information.

Nearly everything you mentioned changed because we saw how the policies put in place panned out. Everyone thought that since the infectious period was 2 weeks that locking up for 2 weeks would do the trick, well, turns out that it’s impossible to “completely” isolate and rates kept going up. Should we have just stuck to our guns and celebrated the “end of COVID?” That wouldn’t make sense.

The biggest recommendation that really didn’t make sense was the “don’t mask” one. My personal believe is that it was likely to prevent a run on PPE, but I think that still harms trust. Who knows what will be or would have been more damaging in the long run though. If hospitals couldn’t get masks, staff would have gotten sick possibly causing more deaths. However the lie has harmed trust and could be one of the reasons for our low vaccination rates in the US, causing more deaths. Hard to know what the right call was. I would lean towards not lying being right though.