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

Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 803 posts

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#701

Post by haiku2077 »

amrocha wrote: post #679
freedomben wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. A family member of mine had a helpful amount of income coming in from a channel of his that was gaining momentum. The point of the channel was to teach gun safety to people new to guns. Keep in mind that where we live, all of this is 100% legal and even encouraged, yet, YouTube threw so many ridiculous barriers in the way that he could not create much content That didn't end up getting removed. He eventually…

Guns are not safe. No matter what you do, accidents will happen. I don’t think Youtube is the place to look for education, and neither does youtube apparently. It’d be pretty bad if someone watched youtube videos and thought they could handle guns safely and ended up hurt. That doesn’t seem like a bad thing to me.

> No matter what you do, accidents will happen.

This is an objectively false statement. There are just four simple safety rules that prevent all unintentional gun injuries, _even if you violate some of the rules some of the time_.

> I don’t think Youtube is the place to look for education

I'm in 30s and have learned probably about as much from Youtube as I did from my entire schooling.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#702

Post by soraminazuki »

npteljes wrote: post #655
neepi wrote: post #162

Yeah YouTube are getting shittier by the day. I keep getting banners telling me that ad blockers aren't allowed on YouTube. Stuff is pretty unwatchable now without them. Well fuck you I'll just download the videos with yt-dlp instead. If that stops working, I'll not bother.

>Stuff is pretty unwatchable now without them. Subscribe to Premium, and the Google ads are gone. I think it's only fair, given how vast and complex YouTube is as a service.

Subscribe to Premium and pay ever-increasing prices [1][2][3] so that Google can track you better with you always being logged into an account with payment information attached. While still being exposed to ads for VPNs, cryptocurrency, scams [4], and more.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41626035

[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36807803

[3]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33279998

[4]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43298054

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#703

Post by captainbland »

swed420 wrote: post #643
captainbland wrote: post #421

Corporate content streaming giant thinks you shouldn't just do it yourself. Honestly this should be obvious but it's nice to have people highlighting concrete examples as people never want to hear this kind of thing.

Reminds me of this BS https://www.tomshardware.com/software/linux/facebook-flags-l...

That makes even less sense, sounds like they made some jump from - "oh we've got to get the hacker community off Facebook, they're a risk"

"hackers are all Linux enthusiasts"

...

"Let's just ban Linux talk to get rid of the hacker community, we don't need that nerd talk on here anyway, it doesn't sell any ads"

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#704

Post by soraminazuki »

npteljes wrote: post #684
amrocha wrote: post #680

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a headline here the other day that Youtube Premium Lite will now have more ads. Eventually Premium will have ads too. It’s just a matter of time.

I don't think I can solve these problems that far ahead. Currently, and for some good years now, YT Premium has not had any Google ads. I think subscribing to it it's presently a good value, and that's about it. We are free to cancel our subscription and do whatever adblocking we can when the ads eventually come. I feel the outrage against the free YT, the free Spotify, and probably other services is misplaced, since…

> I feel the outrage against the free YT, the free Spotify, and probably other services is misplaced

No, it's not misplaced.

- https://consumerrights.wiki/YouTube

- https://consumerrights.wiki/Spotify

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#705

Post by roenxi »

shakna wrote: post #528
roenxi wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its the problem of those they affect. "Infectious" is not self-contained to a singular individual. The stats I've seen suggest the vast majority of people have caught COVID between 2019 and now and pretty much all the preventative measures that worked reliably were things that either individuals could do themselves or that required targeting travellers specifically. It isn't obvious that people trusting YouTube abo…

Even if we assume that's true (everything I've seen says it isn't), then a sole individual always affects others. Humans do not exist as lone monks in the hills, generally speaking. When they are ill, it affects their workplaces, it affects their families, it affects their friends. When they die, it's worse - it affects all of those, but also has tail effects on the health industry. Nothing you do, ever, is in isolat…

I mean, ok. Everything is connected to everything else, true enough. That seems a bit vague. Do you have a specific example to illustrate what you are talking about? Because the 'disinformation' that I saw being banned was typically people with PhDs in vaguely related fields talking about scientific papers. Disagreeing with them seems like a fair play, deplatforming them seems actually damaging. If I can't listen to people with PhDs to learn about academic papers because everything is interconnected then something has gone rather off the rails.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#706

Post by shakna »

Izkata wrote: post #579
shakna wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They attack different things in the virus. Often multiple things at once. Which really should not be surprising.

You got it backwards: the vaccines specifically targeted only the spike protein, while natural infection created different antibodies against all parts of the virus.

Novavax COVID-19 vaccine never targeted specifically the spike protein, and instead focused on boosting the creation of various different antibodies. It is also the least effective.

The current breed of mRNA vaccines targets the spike protein, and the TRIM21 gene. Some of them also attack the S protein directly.

All of them work to boost various antibodies. The "targets" are in addition. By targeting the spike protein, the attack hits the RNA of the virus, not just the protein. The entire cellular structure of the virus breaks down. The same with TRIM21 targets.

The bodies natural defences never targeted the spike protein, and instead focuses on the N-layer, not "all parts of the virus". These natural defences rarely manage to cause the viral cell to decay, they tend to work by slowing reproduction instead.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#707

Post by shakna »

potato3732842 wrote: post #320
shakna wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We also suppress videos on the correct manufacturing process for plastic explosives. Not because doing it safely is a bad idea, but because proliferating bomb making materials is. Covid disinformation got people killed. It will continue to get people killed, especially with a proponent of it leading the US health service. Things likely to lead to death, are likely things you do not want on your platform.

>We also suppress videos on the correct manufacturing process for plastic explosives. Not because doing it safely is a bad idea, but because proliferating bomb making materials is. >Covid disinformation got people killed. It will continue to get people killed, especially with a proponent of it leading the US health service. >Things likely to lead to death, are likely things you do not want on your platform. Prolifera…

Russia's official propaganda technique [0], is about spewing falsehoods, because the truth does not keep coming back up. Lie enough, and people do give up.

Hitler and Goebbels did effectively make use of a ministry dedicated to spewing out as many falsehoods as they could, and it very effectively controlled the flow and acceptance of information in Nazi Germany.

Pol Pot and his Little Red Book empowered the Khmer Rouge, and actively buried the truth to the point where people assisted the regime to become one of the most bloody in all of history.

As Orwell warned us, because he lived through Soviet Russia and their propaganda machine, the truth does not survive when there are those dedicated to twisting it or hiding it to fit their purpose.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firehose_of_falsehood

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#708

Post by trogdor »

haiku2077 wrote: post #701
amrocha wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guns are not safe. No matter what you do, accidents will happen. I don’t think Youtube is the place to look for education, and neither does youtube apparently. It’d be pretty bad if someone watched youtube videos and thought they could handle guns safely and ended up hurt. That doesn’t seem like a bad thing to me.

> No matter what you do, accidents will happen. This is an objectively false statement. There are just four simple safety rules that prevent all unintentional gun injuries, _even if you violate some of the rules some of the time_. > I don’t think Youtube is the place to look for education I'm in 30s and have learned probably about as much from Youtube as I did from my entire schooling.

> There are just four simple safety rules that prevent all unintentional gun injuries, even if you violate some of the rules some of the time.

Rules don’t prevent accidents. Trying your best to always follow the rules helps to prevent accidents.

I agree with GP: where guns exist and humans interact with them, accidents will occasionally happen.

Humans are imperfect. Some people who know the four rules that you are referring to and who try their best to always follow them will still experience accidents.

I own multiple guns, including a machine gun. No matter what I do, there is risk inherent in my decision to be a gun owner.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#709

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

soraminazuki wrote: post #702
npteljes wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Stuff is pretty unwatchable now without them. Subscribe to Premium, and the Google ads are gone. I think it's only fair, given how vast and complex YouTube is as a service.

Subscribe to Premium and pay ever-increasing prices [1][2][3] so that Google can track you better with you always being logged into an account with payment information attached. While still being exposed to ads for VPNs, cryptocurrency, scams [4], and more. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41626035 [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36807803 [3]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33279998 [4]: http…

Also sign yourself up for googles database of ‘people who will actually pay money if we annoy them enough’ meaning you’ll be a target demographic for future premium services

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#710

Post by Izkata »

shakna wrote: post #706
Izkata wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You got it backwards: the vaccines specifically targeted only the spike protein, while natural infection created different antibodies against all parts of the virus.

Novavax COVID-19 vaccine never targeted specifically the spike protein, and instead focused on boosting the creation of various different antibodies. It is also the least effective. The current breed of mRNA vaccines targets the spike protein, and the TRIM21 gene. Some of them also attack the S protein directly. All of them work to boost various antibodies. The "targets" are in addition. By targeting the spike protei…

Novavax's vaccine was also spike-protein-only, the difference between theirs and the mRNA ones was they created it artificially in moths then extracted it for the vaccine instead of generating inside the human body.
Post reply on HN