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
  • “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.

  • 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.

    People are quick to burn Youtube here when its clearly the american copyright reach that causes this.

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

    No one is forcing brave on you lol

  • People are quick to burn Youtube here when its clearly the american copyright reach that causes this.

    I think it's both, a dumb system enforced in a somehow dumber way

  • People are quick to burn Youtube here when its clearly the american copyright reach that causes this.

    YouTube took down the video because of its own policies, not because of copyright law. So we should be blaming YouTube.

    I think it's easy to see exactly why if you consider how YouTube treats small content creators. If I post a video and companies claim copyright on it, the video gets demonetized and I might lose my account. I can respond and contest the claim and maybe I can win but I still lost money in the meantime, and perhaps more significantly, the companies that made their copyright claims will never face a consequence for attempting to burn my channel. In other words, if I get things wrong a few times I'll lose my channel and my income source, but if they get things wrong a million times, they face zero consequence.

    And you might be inclined to blame the media companies. But again, this is YouTube doing what YouTube wants to do of its own volition, and not something that's required by law. If YouTube valued small-scale content creators and end users, it would create different policies.

  • Sue YouTube. They won't change meaningfully until forced to.

    I think what you mean to say is that we should be pressuring public officials to try to bust up Google's monopoly on many things. And we are doing that, and it is showing some progress. But there is much more work to be done.

  • 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.

    you say in the video that you use this setup to watch YouTube. I love watching YouTube with Kodi as it shows no ads. I guess they don't love that.

    I'm not saying that justifies the strike, but it might be connected

  • 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.

    Cries in single digit upload speeds

  • you say in the video that you use this setup to watch YouTube. I love watching YouTube with Kodi as it shows no ads. I guess they don't love that.

    I'm not saying that justifies the strike, but it might be connected

    Didn't they recently greenlight adblocker advertising?

  • 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 video is up again:

    But at some point, he shows he's moving some files to LibreELEC, and he has a folder called "Chernobyl" - how can that possibly be legal, if the folder actually contains files with the HBO show of the same name? Just asking because I'm curious 😊

  • The video is up again:

    But at some point, he shows he's moving some files to LibreELEC, and he has a folder called "Chernobyl" - how can that possibly be legal, if the folder actually contains files with the HBO show of the same name? Just asking because I'm curious 😊

    You don't know the exact content of the files. He did not show those vidoeclips. I dont know if you can buy that or not. Sure it can be indication but in general you dont know as it varies between video to video if it is possible to buy.

  • 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.

    Maybe stop relying on fucking youtube?

  • New Orleans debates real-time facial recognition legislation

    Technology technology
    12
    1
    150 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    27 Aufrufe
    A
    [image: 62e40d75-1358-46a4-a7a5-1f08c6afe4dc.jpeg] Palantir had a contract with New Orleans starting around ~2012 to create their predictive policing tech that scans surveillance cameras for very vague details and still misidentifies people. It's very similar to Lavender, the tech they use to identify members of Hamas and attack with drones. This results in misidentified targets ~10% of the time, according to the IDF (likely it's a much higher misidentification rate than 10%). Palantir picked Louisiana over somewhere like San Francisco bc they knew it would be a lot easier to violate rights and privacy here and get away with it. Whatever they decide in New Orleans on Thursday during this Council meeting that nobody cares about, will likely be the first of its kind on the books legal basis to track civilians in the U.S. and allow the federal government to take control over that ability whenever they want. This could also set a precedent for use in other states. Guess who's running the entire country right now, and just gave high ranking army contracts to Palantir employees for "no reason" while they are also receiving a multimillion dollar federal contract to create an insane database on every American and giant data centers are being built all across the country.
  • 52 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    kolanaki@pawb.socialK
    Same. That's probably why I suck ass at math, but my spatial awareness is off the chart. 🫠
  • 144 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    B
    I know there decent alternatives to SalesForce, but I’m not sure what you’d replace Slack with. Teams is far worse in every conceivable way and I’m not sure if there’s anything else out there that isn’t already speeding down the enshittification highway.
  • 15 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • A ban on state AI laws could smash Big Tech’s legal guardrails

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    121 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    P
    It's always been "states rights" to enrich rulers at the expense of everyone else.
  • Forced E-Waste PCs And The Case Of Windows 11’s Trusted Platform

    Technology technology
    116
    1
    317 Stimmen
    116 Beiträge
    72 Aufrufe
    K
    I was pretty lucky in university as most of my profs were either using cross platform stuff or Linux exclusive software. I had a single class that wanted me using windows stuff and I just dropped that one. Awesome that you're getting back into it, it's definitely the best it's ever been (and you're right that Steam cracked the code). It sounds like you probably know what you're doing if you're running Linux VMs and stuff, but feel free to shoot me a PM if you run into any questions or issues I might be able to point you in the right direction for.
  • 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
  • Skype was shut down for good today

    Technology technology
    6
    1
    8 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    L
    ::: spoiler spoiler sadfsafsafsdfsd :::