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

YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 233 posts

Re: YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

#91

Post by robjan »

ZetaZero wrote: post #64
DelightOne wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be automatic.

I don't have enough disk space to archive every video I've every watched.

This is a problem that decentralised protocols such as IPFS theoretically solve. You reserve x GB on your storage to cache the content you consume and can optionally "pin" content to keep it on your disk indefinitely.

The problem is there are privacy concerns with this type of system as it's possible for anyone to find out who has consumed particular content.

Re: YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

#93

Post by wvh »

mindslight wrote: post #34
plainnoodles wrote: post #7

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 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…

Assuming Youtube video IDs are unique even in the case of removal, we could just create a URN space for Youtube, say urn:google:youtube:. Another option would be a content-bassed hash, but that would make quality variations of the same video unrelated.

Once you switch to a permanent resource identifier, you don't need to rely on Google for locating the video anymore. That won't replace Youtube as the massive video store it is, which is probably not a (financially, legally) feasible undertaking even on a national level, but at least you untangled one part of the kludge.

Re: YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

#94

Post by skissane »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #22
revolvingocelot wrote: post #4

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...

> 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.

Do they actually delete the videos? For all we know, the video is still stored on Google's servers indefinitely, there is just a flag set which blocks public access to it. If a government or UN agency asks for a copy of the video, is Google able and willing to provide it? Knowingly destroying evidence of a crime is (often) a crime; denying public access to evidence of a crime is not a crime, especially if you are still happy to provide it to the proper authorities on request.

Regarding "Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime", I don't believe that is actually true. Under the Rome Statute of the ICC, war crimes are crimes against article 8; destroying evidence of a war crime is not a war crime, because it is not an article 8 crime, it is a crime against article 70 ("Offences against the administration of justice"). Other international treaties against war crimes (such as the Geneva Conventions), and national laws against war crimes (such as the US War Crimes Act codified at 18 USC 2441), likewise do not consider destroying evidence of a war crime to be a war crime, instead it is a non-war crime against the administration of justice.

Re: YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

#95

Post by Vinnl »

josefx wrote: post #63
theandrewbailey wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Isn't YouTube headquartered in one of those countries that officially consider foreign war crime tribunals directed at their citizens a reason to invade the responsible country?

Context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague_Invasion_Act

Re: YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

#97

Post by est31 »

solarkraft wrote: post #41

I’ve been archiving some content before, but recent occurrences keep strengthening my belief that there needs to be a collaborative archive. A single party can’t archive everything they may ever look for, often enough you don’t even know what it may be (and when you do it’s too late). Are there any projects like this? I imagine a decentralization through something like torrents or IPFS (with the caveat that different…

https://reddit.com/r/datahoarder

https://archive.org

Re: YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

#98

Post by JKCalhoun »

Retric wrote: post #77
ZetaZero wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have enough disk space to archive every video I've every watched.

You can probably do it just fine for every video you watched twice.

Having also seen cool videos in my YT playlists disappear over time, I've been "caching" the ones more precious to me.

Re: YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

#99

Post by mgdlbp »

The original video was at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKbU8B-QVZk

The Wayback Machine archives YouTube videos. I don't know how it archives or determines which videos to archive, but it has a surprising number of popular videos (but also ones with only a few thousand views and not some of those with billions, possibly because they're so high-profile due to copyright?). It also archives the video only once (creators may alter videos slightly, IIRC) and not always with the highest-quality format (possibly due an underlying problem with youtube-dl's `best` option).

YouTube is special-cased with processing to replace the player on the archived video page with the archived video (which is indexed with a mangled googlevideo.com URL, the same type as retrieved by youtube-dl), but this doesn't always work. Fortunately, archived videos can also be accessed directly by video ID through the (very undocumented) WB Machine-specific 'fake' URL:

" rel="nofollow">http://wayback-fakeurl.archive.org/yt/

The video in question is at:

https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://wayback-fakeurl.archive...

Edit: A very early reupload (2007-10-28, compared to the original video's 2007-07-13) is still up at _X6VoFBCE9k, but is of degraded quality and has an additional watermark.

Re: YouTube removes “I Can't Believe You've Done This” video from 2007

#100

Post by throwaway09223 »

ZetaZero wrote: post #64
DelightOne wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be automatic.

I don't have enough disk space to archive every video I've every watched.

You probably do.

Let's say you watch new and unique youtube videos for an hour a day, or 365 hours a year. (This is a lot more than I watch, btw)

Let's say we have 5Mbps videos, or half a megabyte per second.

365 * 60 * 60 * 0.5 = 657G/year

A 1TB disk is about $50, for about $25/year to store it at home.

If you upload your videos to S3 Glacier it'll run around $8/year (per year, so after a few years this is more expensive than buying drives).

For comparison, YT premium is $144/year.

I only watch about 10 minutes of unique youtube videos a day on average, so I'm looking at around $1/year cost if I want to archive every single youtube video I've ever seen. It's pretty affordable.

Post reply on HN