81–90 of 233 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's a shame a torrenting-based youtube wouldn't > really work for various reasons, both legal and social. https://joinpeertube.org/
Yeah, I know they exist. But they're never going to replace youtube in the foreseeable future, so having tools like youtube-dl, which would allow us to load content from youtube into peertube, for instance (or to archive it anywhere else), is important.
I know people may be desensitized at this point, but if you can't see the correlation with the book 1984's consistent theme of the past and current being scrubbed of "wrongthink" that is thrown down the "memoryhole" to dispose of it, then I think we are all in for a far worse future than we would like.
If only Hacker News crowd noticed when thousands of videos with interviews, medical lectures, news footage and even congressional testimonies were removed for political reasons within the last couple years.
Do you happen to have any reference that points out which content was removed for political reasons?
You're on HN. If said censorship exists then nothing stops you from pointing it on HN.
Here is my open letter to people working for Google: Dear googlers: Quit. You’ll make plenty elsewhere; just stop ruining the Internet please.
Don't quit! I'd rather have good, honest people working at Google, instead of them quitting Google. What would Google be like if no good people worked there?
Can it get worse? Because it looks like whatever good guys are left don't have a voice anymore.
I know people may be desensitized at this point, but if you can't see the correlation with the book 1984's consistent theme of the past and current being scrubbed of "wrongthink" that is thrown down the "memoryhole" to dispose of it, then I think we are all in for a far worse future than we would like.
Cringe
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Private companies seem to be the only ones with the resources to store all the video content we produce Definitely not. It's an addressing problem. I guarantee plenty of people have the youtube video downloaded with more redundancy than Google, and the OP even has the source files. The problem is that Youtube became the canonical URL for referencing the video, assuming singular power to control that address based o…
Ooh. Crazy, not at all thought through, probably bad, legislation idea popped in to my head: EU Data Address Ownership Directive: All services that allow users to upload data that is then made publicly available, MUST have a method for the user to create a 301 redirect to another location where the content is available. (Maybe allowing for a "Are you sure you want to follow the link to https://alternative.com and lea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you are confusing Youtube with a NGO. Google is a for profit company. Their mission is to make money, not to archive the internet. They are not your friend. Nor anybody's friend.
I get your rather stunted libertarian take, but fact of the matter is that they are not allowed to delete or remove evidence of crimes.
If only Hacker News crowd noticed when thousands of videos with interviews, medical lectures, news footage and even congressional testimonies were removed for political reasons within the last couple years.
> If only Hacker News crowd noticed when thousands of videos with interviews, medical lectures, news footage and even congressional testimonies were removed for political reasons within the last couple years. Do you happen to have any reference that points out which content was removed for political reasons? You're on HN. If said censorship exists then nothing stops you from pointing it on HN.
This is truly wrong. Far from censorship, this is a field test of memory-holing. Deleting a part of the history of the Internet (yes, this silly little nonsense video is now part of Modern Culture) is a Rubicon I'm shocked YouTube has the temerity to cross. I can't wait to see what more conventional history they'll delete. For now, note the conscious blowing-off, on YouTube's part, of all the re-uploads. Will they al…
Not just history of the internet: Youtube takes down videos of war crimes. Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime. I'm surprised that Youtube isn't in hot water over that. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170812/01102937985/once-... https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/youtube-ai-deletes-war-cr...
Sometimes we want it big enough to fight against state-level censorship; sometimes we want it small enough to obey anti-trust or privacy law.
This isn't a great specific example (it's "just" a meme and not even a particularly culturally significant one in the grand scheme of things), but in general this is why projects like youtube-dl are important. It might not be glamorous, and it might be a little stupid, but damnit this is our culture, for better or worse! And we should preserve it. Private companies seem to be the only ones with the resources to store…
> Private companies seem to be the only ones with the resources to store all the video content we produce, If you are producing videos at such a rate that you as the producer cannot actually save the content, then maybe you're doing it wrong . If you are producing content for the exclusive use/distribution by a private company that is known to have draconian automated decision making processes, you have to expect tha…
You can film 8K video on a smartphone these days… but only about 15 minutes of it before you fill up the phone’s internal storage.
If you don’t have a computer with a big hard drive to dump the video off on, you’re basically stuck shoving the video out to “the cloud” and then deleting the local copy so that you can film more. Whether that means pushing the raws to a private object store with an online video editing system hooked up to it, vs. uploading to YouTube where they transcode the raw to lower quality and then throw away the original, it still creates a dependence on the continued existence of some cloud provider.