YouTube bans content “showing users how to bypass secure computer systems” • Hacker News Board

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

#651

Post by lucb1e » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 7:29 AM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #624

FooHentai wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better perhaps, but what's your proposed path to implementing that? Is it achievable, and what eggs get broken in the course of cooking that omelette? One huge roadblock I can see is that you would need to address the question of what would replace privately held platforms? If the suggested replacement is something the government operates, you now have to address how that conflicts with the overall neoliberal philoso…

> If the suggested replacement is something the government operates No. That is the exact opposite of helpful. What you need is something that nobody/everybody operates, in the style of email. A protocol (like SMTP), not a platform (like Facebook). A government could usefully fund the development of such a thing though.

I like your idea since it would mean more self-hosting and decentralisation, but I'm afraid it's the much more complicated way of doing things, and if it could ever happen, I'm not sure it can anymore given that we already have these platforms and especially the USA government would never shut them down, citing economic and national security (everyone's data now has to pass through the USA) reasons.

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

#652

Post by earenndil » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 7:41 AM UTC

pgt wrote: post #450

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…

Ah, but we do know how to navigate the wilderness. You see, we built this city. We built it on ARP and IP. And we can build it again - next time with better foundations. The gatekeepers underestimate how long tastemakers are willing to go without them to discourage long-term bad behaviour. My only regret is that I did not contribute to building DuckDuckGo.

Who is 'we'? You know, and I know. Most users of youtube do not.

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

#653

Post by hereonbusiness » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 8:10 AM UTC

They should just ban all interesting content already so creators finally move to better platforms some of which are probably yet to be created. Watching YouTube these days without adblocker is just painful, not to mention the broken copyright claim system which has to be the way it is partly because YouTube is just too big.

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

#654

Post by irundebian » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 8:19 AM UTC

Offensive security Youtube videos doesn't help the world to make computer systems more secure. The offensive security subculture deals more about fame, fun and profit. Therefore I'm a little happy on the reaction of some offensive/black hat security people, although I agree that the policy is to ambiguous to be fair. The obvious intention of the policy is obviously the removal script-kiddy like videos which are showing either "how to hack Facebook" bullshit videos or videos which are concretely showing how to harm one concrete business. The boundaries between immature script-kiddy videos and offensive/blackhat security videos are not very clear.

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

#655

Post by otakucode » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 8:31 AM UTC

andrekandre wrote: post #511

otakucode wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will be ineffective. Google whitelists many channels by large organizations and they are sheltered from any such reports. If 200k reports came in on the next Microsoft video posted, someone at YouTube might notice, but the video would never be taken down. You should read (as should everyone else) Eric Schmidt's book 'A New Digital Age'. In it he lies out his view. Basically (and obviously this is my perspective,…

> because Google is rich, they are Better. The teeming masses of the unwashed must be yolked by their betters. Left to their own devices, the public would destroy themselves and it is the responsibility of Google and other gigacorps to create culture in order to preserve civilization (probably an unpopular opinion, but...) sounds like neoliberalism

Really? It is almost the textbook definition of Conservatism. Not like 'Republicans are conservative', but the political science sort of Conservatism that ruled the world for centuries, the ideology that supports monarchies, dictatorships, theocracies, etc. The belief that the rights of the state (or church or similar) are primary, that some people are 'special' in a way that destines them to lead while the majority are destined to follow because they are constitutionally incapable of anything else. A refutation of that was the meaning of "all men are created equal" in the Declaration of Independence which was the first official codification of Liberalism. Liberalism then conquered the world, but I imagine there's nothing absolute in place that would prevent it from re-emerging.

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

#656

Post by glenneroo » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 8:46 AM UTC

jolmg wrote: post #402

UncleChis wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only one gets annoyed when people use "than" while it should be "then"? And hell a lot of such people!

> people use "than" while it should Don't you mean "when"? "people use 'than' when it should..."

GP's second sentence could also use some grammar love ;)

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

#657

Post by alasdair_ » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 8:58 AM UTC

analognoise wrote: post #410

otakucode wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reply to you makes the unsubstantiated claim that YouTube is a profit-seeking company. They ignore the fact that, no, YouTube has not operated as a profit-seeking company. The reason YouTube is, and will remain, the pre-eminent video platform is because it was run at a profound loss for over a decade, losing hundreds of millions of dollars at a clip, for no reason other than to totally suppress competition. Framing…

Your local auto parts store prices oil lower than a mechanic can get it for, just to bring people in the door to sell them other items. This is a well known tactic; these items are called "loss leaders". The fact that in this environment other people have successfully made video sharing websites (without a billion dollars, no less) means that the environment is competitive, even with the loss leader tactic. On TOP of…

>Your local auto parts store prices oil lower than a mechanic can get it for

Why doesn't the mechanic just buy their oil from the auto parts store?

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

#658

Post by scoutt » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 8:58 AM UTC

da_chicken wrote: post #562

I've been trying to argue for awhile that if the major public venues become privately moderated that it would have a chilling effect on free speech. I continually get the rhetoric that free speech only applies to the government (it doesn't; the First Amendment only applies to the government but the ideal of free speech is a universal human right) and that censorship is something only the government can do (also not t…

to participate in public discourse even when the venue is privately held

So if I come to your house, to your birthday party, and I start teaching people (or just talking) about torture, scams, rape techniques, differences of classes/races/whatever, etc. or simply teaching kids how to hack an ATM, will you be OK with it? Would you ask me to leave?

Edit: saying all of that possibly while arguing that "it's just educational" even when it may or may not be the real reason.

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

#659

Post by alasdair_ » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 9:00 AM UTC

Is there any evidence of things like Defcon and Blackhat talks being pulled?

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

#660

Post by majewsky » Thu, Jul 04, 2019, 9:13 AM UTC

grafporno wrote: post #128

toomuchtodo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please use tubeup [1] to backup at risk videos to the Internet Archive. It uses youtube-dl on the backend for retrieving content, subtitles, etc, and will properly set metadata for the item in the archive. The content will be darked if there’s an issue serving it, and the IA staff and storage system will throttle you if necessary (which will bubble up as s3 timeouts). DEFCON, CCC, and other infosec groups need to mov…

CCC famously rolls their own streaming infrastructure during congress and all of it is available at https://media.ccc.de/

Not just during congress. The C3VOC (CCC Video Operations Center) serves Chaos events and tech conferences throughout the whole year.

Source: Volunteered for VOC duty a few times.