YouTube relaxes moderation rules to allow more controversial content. Videos are allowed if "freedom of expression value may outweigh harm risk"
Technology
67
Beiträge
48
Kommentatoren
311
Aufrufe
-
Intention: YouTubers can stop with the whole self censoring shit.
Example: Unaliving; PDF file; grape; etc.
Reality: Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, and other right wing grifters receive zero censorship while YouTubers still have to self censor to receive monetization.
YouTube started to censor foss content for being violet and dangerous.
-
This post did not contain any content.
See the issue here is Google/Youtube still get to be the ones to decide what "may outweigh the harm risk". And the answer I bet will usually be whichever one serves their financial interests.
Which on one hand sure, it is their platform after all. But don't do me dry and claim you used lube.
-
This is just going to be used to allow fascist propaganda, isn't it?
First thought exactly.
-
Personally I don't use YouTube the website at all at this point. I'm 100℅ Freetube and yt-dlp/Plex for watching the channels I like.
That's fine, still YouTube at its core though.
-
The alternatives are there. They don't have the volume of course, but they're very much born...
Yes they are, some from the very conception of YouTube perhaps, but they are not real alternatives a real alternative would be one where all your subscriptions also upload the same content there, it is totally not YT based and you get the same or similar ecosystem Google provides, I don't think too many channels fit this.
-
Yes they are, some from the very conception of YouTube perhaps, but they are not real alternatives a real alternative would be one where all your subscriptions also upload the same content there, it is totally not YT based and you get the same or similar ecosystem Google provides, I don't think too many channels fit this.
I mean, if your requirement for a youtube alternative is that it's as big as YouTube, you're just guaranteeing that there will never be a YouTube alternative...
-
I mean, if your requirement for a youtube alternative is that it's as big as YouTube, you're just guaranteeing that there will never be a YouTube alternative...
Yeah perhaps, we are here on Lemmy after all, which I consider a Reddit alternative, but with YouTube the thing is different because we follow individuals, and here we follow subjects, hopefully somebody can truly stand out against Google in the video field, a movement big enough to motivate content creators to check it out, the last thing I hear was about Odysee, which I think is a step in the right direction.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I still wouldn't trust Google not to nuke my channel on a whim even in spite of those relaxed moderation rules. What's stopping a little bribe from the right company or political party from causing them to backpedal or even tighten their grip further?
This is why one should at least mirror their content to PeerTube or a similar alternative platform like that even if they're not going to just outright post future content to said alternative and give up on YT altogether.
-
Yeah perhaps, we are here on Lemmy after all, which I consider a Reddit alternative, but with YouTube the thing is different because we follow individuals, and here we follow subjects, hopefully somebody can truly stand out against Google in the video field, a movement big enough to motivate content creators to check it out, the last thing I hear was about Odysee, which I think is a step in the right direction.
Peertube is also a thing. Obviously, someone can't make it on Peertube alone, but lots of folk out there upload to YouTube and to Peertube
-
YouTube started to censor foss content for being violet and dangerous.
How long before Google locks YT down to loading only on Chrome, and only on Windows, Mac, ChromeOS, or Android, and only without ad blockers of any kind, including hardware ad blockers like PiHole being implemented anywhere, and straight-up blocking it from loading at all on non-Chrome browsers (to also include other Chromium browsers) and on Linux or iOS, and enforcing TPM2 and SecureBoot mandates for authentication, and blocking downloading and re-uploading of YT vids, using DRM?
Basically, I wouldn't put it above them to ensure their video platform only runs on their browser, and only on hardware that they deem worthy of running it, even if it means somehow implementing a Vanguard-style rootkit. Something else I wouldn't put it past Google to try, is completely discontinuing the YT browser client and fully locking the API down to the official app, and still implementing a Vanguard-style rootkit on that.
-
YouTube started to censor foss content for being violet and dangerous.
They won't ever say it out loud but they have always removed videos for mentioning alternative frontends or other technology they view as direct threats to their revenue stream.
-
I assume you mean fascist propaganda over and above the right wing rabbit holes that already exist on YouTube….
Ugh, this is terrible.
there were so much rw propaganda before they announced this.
-
This is such bad news. I'm sympathetic to content creators who have to step on eggshells to please the algorithm/advertisers... But this?
Yeah, this is not that. We all know who this is for.
almost all the right wing contents get pushed to the front. there are some that are also rw that is buried by the algorithim, because they are loud mouths, i wonder if this will change for them too.,
-
YouTube started to censor foss content for being violet and dangerous.
for being violet
But what if it was chartreuse?
-
This post did not contain any content.
This sucks but I think this will lead to a Youtube exodus and other platforms like Peertube will creator and user base will grow
-
Good. I don't really care about youtube, but less censorship is always a good thing.
How can you people say you respect science when you support silencing any criticism of it? That's not science. That's religion.
That said, this criteria clearly only exists to protect "influencers" who make youtube a proportional amount of money. If you have a channel with very little traffic and you say something controversial, you'd better believe your "freedom of expression value" will not be high enough to outweigh the corporation's perceived "harm risk."
It's likely going to be selective censorship, i.e. Nazi cunts stay, criticism of said Nazi cunts will go.
-
It's likely going to be selective censorship, i.e. Nazi cunts stay, criticism of said Nazi cunts will go.
You must be living in a bubble if you truly believe that.
-
I still wouldn't trust Google not to nuke my channel on a whim even in spite of those relaxed moderation rules. What's stopping a little bribe from the right company or political party from causing them to backpedal or even tighten their grip further?
This is why one should at least mirror their content to PeerTube or a similar alternative platform like that even if they're not going to just outright post future content to said alternative and give up on YT altogether.
I agree. We've seen enough times in the past where a creator would get a strike from a video several years old because the rules changes. Anyone legit should be careful.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Wait what??? This came out of nowhere ??
YouTube not cracking down on free speech??
-
How long before Google locks YT down to loading only on Chrome, and only on Windows, Mac, ChromeOS, or Android, and only without ad blockers of any kind, including hardware ad blockers like PiHole being implemented anywhere, and straight-up blocking it from loading at all on non-Chrome browsers (to also include other Chromium browsers) and on Linux or iOS, and enforcing TPM2 and SecureBoot mandates for authentication, and blocking downloading and re-uploading of YT vids, using DRM?
Basically, I wouldn't put it above them to ensure their video platform only runs on their browser, and only on hardware that they deem worthy of running it, even if it means somehow implementing a Vanguard-style rootkit. Something else I wouldn't put it past Google to try, is completely discontinuing the YT browser client and fully locking the API down to the official app, and still implementing a Vanguard-style rootkit on that.
they are working on it
- https://sh.itjust.works/post/2147959
- https://monero.town/post/989081
- https://lemmy.ml/post/2546109
- https://github.com/chromium/chromium/pull/187
don't worry, they didn't abandon it. they have continued development hidden from sight in the android version of the chromium engine
