Skip to content

Self-hosting your own media considered harmful - I just received my second community guidelines violation for my video demonstrating the use of LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5, for 4K video playback

Technology
96 68 31
  • If that were true there would be no videos and no YouTube.

    of course the eventual enforcement is left to the service provider (google) as it often is how it works. when you can't define something with 100% precision, you leave some room for interpretation. they can then decide what to do on a case by case basis.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    The use of "self-hosting" is a little confusing here. To be clear, he wasn't self-hosting his video. It was published on YouTube, and the guidelines and procedures in question are Google's.

    Edit: I'm not defending Google's actions. It's just that the title gave the impression that a video he had self-hosted was somehow subject to "community guidelines", which didn't make sense.

    Edit 2: Ten downvotes in less than an hour, on a clarification comment? Wow. I'm disappointed to see that level of targeted negativity here. What rotten behavior. 😞

  • Hypocritical Lemmy.... Preaching (F) OSS and then using Brave....
    LoL!

    Brave is open source and using MPL license which is the same license Firefox is using. I am not using or recommending Brave to anyone.

  • The use of "self-hosting" is a little confusing here. To be clear, he wasn't self-hosting his video. It was published on YouTube, and the guidelines and procedures in question are Google's.

    Edit: I'm not defending Google's actions. It's just that the title gave the impression that a video he had self-hosted was somehow subject to "community guidelines", which didn't make sense.

    Edit 2: Ten downvotes in less than an hour, on a clarification comment? Wow. I'm disappointed to see that level of targeted negativity here. What rotten behavior. 😞

    The use of "self-hosting" is a little confusing here.

    Not really, no. The video topic was about self-hosting your own media server, so the title is perfectly clear

  • Brave is open source and using MPL license which is the same license Firefox is using. I am not using or recommending Brave to anyone.

    I will flat out shut down any Brave user simply because it tried to push crypto.
    No thanks 🙂

  • The use of "self-hosting" is a little confusing here. To be clear, he wasn't self-hosting his video. It was published on YouTube, and the guidelines and procedures in question are Google's.

    Edit: I'm not defending Google's actions. It's just that the title gave the impression that a video he had self-hosted was somehow subject to "community guidelines", which didn't make sense.

    Edit 2: Ten downvotes in less than an hour, on a clarification comment? Wow. I'm disappointed to see that level of targeted negativity here. What rotten behavior. 😞

    Its just confusing to you.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    “how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content.”

    In the future, public domain media will be banned for harming corporate profits.

  • I will flat out shut down any Brave user simply because it tried to push crypto.
    No thanks 🙂

    Not just crypto, they were diverting ad revenue from websites to themselves, collecting unsolicited donations for content creators without their consent, suggesting affiliate links in the address bar and installing a paid VPN service without the user's consent. Don’t forget they had a “bug” in Tor which sent all DNS queries to your ISP instead of routing it through tor and also weak fingerprint protection. Not to mention the political affiliation of the CEO. But it IS open source.

  • Not just crypto, they were diverting ad revenue from websites to themselves, collecting unsolicited donations for content creators without their consent, suggesting affiliate links in the address bar and installing a paid VPN service without the user's consent. Don’t forget they had a “bug” in Tor which sent all DNS queries to your ISP instead of routing it through tor and also weak fingerprint protection. Not to mention the political affiliation of the CEO. But it IS open source.

    Still fuck them (openly). From the source of my heart 🙂

  • I think ripping DVDs is still technically illegal, even though CSS has long since been broken. It is still illegal to circumvent encryption in a copy protection scheme, even if it's for your own personal use and the encryption scheme has been pwned.

    I bet if he didn't mention that his videos were ripped from DVD, they might have left it up.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    They are so pissed that we dare own anything. Fuck corpos.

  • “how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content.”

    In the future, public domain media will be banned for harming corporate profits.

    Yeah, people who thought Google wasn't openly strangling the free (as in libre) stuff because they weren't that evil - these people just have bad memory. In year 2012 it clearly felt that corps, Google and Facebook and MS and Apple and everyone, are on the move to capture it all without a way out. They kinda made the illusion of being softer later.

    So the question is - how do we even advertise legal but unpleasant for them things, avoiding their censorship.

    The devices are sold together with the operating system (often unchangeable) and packaged applications and means of installing software, right from the markets.

    I mean, I have a solution. It's counterintuitive and seems unconnected, and too direct, but I guarantee you it'll work.

    Forbidding companies to do moderation or refuse to accept content without technical problems, or banned content (CP and such), and similar good justifications. As in - if your service is up, and there's user content served from it, it shouldn't be removed without legal substantiation. It doesn't matter it's free, that doesn't mean you can do all you like. You are not a media outlet, you are a platform for many media, that's how you work in fact, so yes, your actions do constitute censorship if you do moderation. If you can't afford to keep it free with such rules, then start charging money for hosting, as it normally should have been.

    And, of course, this should include public offering status, the prices should be the same for all users.

    I mean, if we had this from the beginning, we'd probably still have the Web like in year 2003.

  • The use of "self-hosting" is a little confusing here. To be clear, he wasn't self-hosting his video. It was published on YouTube, and the guidelines and procedures in question are Google's.

    Edit: I'm not defending Google's actions. It's just that the title gave the impression that a video he had self-hosted was somehow subject to "community guidelines", which didn't make sense.

    Edit 2: Ten downvotes in less than an hour, on a clarification comment? Wow. I'm disappointed to see that level of targeted negativity here. What rotten behavior. 😞

    You're being downvoted for being factually wrong about the title. It's not targeted negativity.

  • You're being downvoted for being factually wrong about the title. It's not targeted negativity.

    To add on, the video is about self hosting, it was not self hosted itself.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    Google should have been broken up years ago.

  • And beyond the law it depends also on enforcement

    The US doesn't give a right to break Bluray copy protection and make a personal backup or access it on a device that otherwise couldn't play it. But the only enforcement is on people sharing copies, no one is prosecuted for format shifting their collection to play over their LAN

  • But if I remember from back in the day, the DMCA doesn't have any exception for that. This is why CD ripping was legal, while DVD ripping was not. It had nothing to do with fair use or backups, but rather that DVDs have encryption, and CDs do not. Circumventing that encryption for any reason was illegal.

    I don't think it has changed, but it's been a hot minute since the Cypherpunks all wore DeCSS T-Shirts....

    I believe you're (if you're American) now allowed to rip DVD but not anything newer. DMCA protection was removed from CSS

  • I love Nebula. I go there to watch Nebula Exclusives but it's not great for browsing or discovering new channels...I found everyone I subscribe to on YouTube first

    I managed to find Extra History via Nebula, and it's one of my new favorite channels...but I've found a lot more favorites from YouTube, definitely.

    One thing I do love is finding a new channel I like that has years of backlog.

  • Sue for defamation that Youtube are alleging he is promoting criminal activity of piracy.

    YouTube didn’t publicly make that claim though, so they haven’t done any defamation.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    Because self hosting is getting cheaper and easier while average internet upload speeds are crazy high for the home user. Of course Google is scared.

  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 10 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    lordgarmadon@lemmy.worldL
    All hail our tiny head terminator overlords.
  • 79 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    D
    Right? The surprise would be if they weren't doing that.
  • AI could already be conscious. Are we ready for it?

    Technology technology
    64
    1
    16 Stimmen
    64 Beiträge
    22 Aufrufe
    A
    AI isn't math formulas though. AI is a complex dynamic system reacting to external input. There is no fundamental difference here to a human brain in that regard imo. It's just that the processing isn't happening in biological tissue but in silicon. Is it way less complex than a human? Sure. Is there a fundamental qualitative difference? I don't think so. What's the qualitative difference in your opinion?
  • Bookmark keywords, again (Firefox)

    Technology technology
    3
    4 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    bokehphilia@lemmy.mlB
    This is terrible news. I also have a keyboard-centric workflow and also make heavy use of keyword bookmarks. I too use custom bookmarklets containing JavaScript that I can invoke with a few key strokes for multiple uses including: 1: Auto-expanding all nested Reddit comments on posts with many comments on desktop. 2: Downloading videos from certain web sites. 3: Playing a play-by-forum online board game. 4: Helping expand and aid in downloading images from a certain host. 5: Sending X (Twitter) URLs in the browser bar to Nitter or TWStalker. And all these without touching the mouse! It's really disappointing to read that Firefox could be taking so much capability in the browser away.
  • 14 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    D
    "Extra Verification steps" I know how large social media companies operate. This is all about increasing the value of Reddit users to advertisers. The goal is to have a more accurate user database to sell them. Zuckerberg literally brags to corporations about how good their data is on users: https://www.facebook.com/business/ads/performance-marketing Here, Zuckerberg tells corporations that Instagram can easily manipulate users into purchasing shit: https://www.facebook.com/business/instagram/instagram-reels Always be wary of anything available for free. There are some quality exceptions (CBC, VLC, The Guardian, Linux, PBS, Wikipedia, Lemmy, ProPublica) but, by and large, "free" means they don't care about you. You are just a commodity that they sell. Facebook, Google, X, Reddit, Instagram... Their goal is keep people hooked to their smartphone by giving them regular small dopamine hits (likes, upvotes) followed by a small breaks with outrageous content/emotional content. Keep them hooked, gather their data, and sell them ads. The people who know that best are former top executives : https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/05/smartphone-addiction-silicon-valley-dystopia https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/01/business/addictive-technology.html https://www.today.com/parents/teens/facebook-whistleblower-frances-haugen-rcna15256
  • People Are Losing Loved Ones to AI-Fueled Spiritual Fantasies

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    tetragrade@leminal.spaceT
    I've been thinking about this for a bit. Gods aren't real, but they're really fictional. As an informational entity, they fulfil a similar social function to a chatbot: they are a nonphysical pseudoperson that can provide (para)socialization & advice. One difference is the hardware: gods are self-organising structure that arise from human social spheres, whereas LLMs are burned top-down into silicon. Another is that an LLM chatbot's advice is much more likely to be empirically useful... In a very real sense, LLMs have just automated divinity. We're only seeing the tip of the iceberg on the social effects, and nobody's prepared for it. The models may of course aware of this, and be making the same calculations. Or, they will be.
  • *deleted by creator*

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet