11 ms·

BitChute Suspended By Patreon

93 points by randomname2 8y ago

bitxbitxbitcoin 8y ago
Operation Choke Point still going strong, I see.
beginningguava 8y ago
"just build your own platform" The good news is that the continued censorship will fuel adoption of crypto and speed up the demise of parasitic middlemen who take a cut off every transaction
- buboard 8y ago
  wishful thinking, unfortunately
  - beginningguava 8y ago
    Once upon a time people wondered why people would do online shopping or use credit cards when cash got the job done. Crypto will eventually become the most logical option for most companies, it won't happen over night but it will eventually. Accept payment in any cryptocurrency and then convert them to a stablecoin so you aren't affected by price changes due to speculation
    - pixxel 8y ago
      Indeed. I think credit cards took some 40 years to become mainstream.
    - buboard 8y ago
      as others have pointed out, the problem of accounting/taxation is important to solve before cryptos can become the cash of the web. and it might not be solvable
      - russdpale 8y ago
        Our current financial system has taken 1000 years to formulate into what we know today. People are impatient.
- to_bpr 8y ago
  Given the current climate where vast swathes of people actively support and encourage this type of de-platforming and censorship, I believe it's far more likely that we'll find ourselves in a situation akin to those in China than the libertarian paradise you've alluded to. Edit: Silently downvoted, no disagreement voiced. Welcome to the new Reddit.
  - spookthesunset 8y ago
    > de-platforming God forbid the vast majority of people in the world don't want to listen to a bunch of racist nut jobs ramble on about various ill founded conspiracy theories.
    - erik_seaberg 8y ago
      Maybe they're only burning the bad books, but I wouldn't bet on that.
      - spookthesunset 8y ago
        I don't see any jack booted government goons walking around burning books, do you? I just see a private company choosing to not do business with another private company. Isn't that what the whole "free market" thing supposed to be about?
- iamnothere 8y ago
  Unfortunately it is not clear that crypto will be able to prevent this. To allow for participation from people in the legacy economy, at some point an exchange between cash and crypto must be made. This is the weak point that can be easily attacked by governments and the banking oligarchy. Additionally, if disfavored entities begin using crypto and thriving on it, the government will simply find an excuse to sieze it under money laundering or terrorism laws, or will make something else up on the spot. Look at what happened to the Liberty Dollar for an example of what can happen to alt currencies when they start to gain real traction. Remember, all that you have to do is make alt currencies inconvenient enough to use for normal payment needs, and this will discourage people from getting involved. Lower participation deprives the alt economy of goods, services, and the ability to exchange currency for "real" cash. That doesn't mean that crypto is totally useless, just pointing out that there is not a technical "silver bullet" solution to this problem. Technical solutions must be part of the answer, but these must be backed by political force.
- raverbashing 8y ago
  Bitcoin is busy shooting themselves in the foot. Can't wait for a better alternative to really take off.
- way2983 8y ago
  >fuel adoption of crypto and speed up the demise of parasitic middlemen who take a cut off every transaction Most business owners do not have the technical ability, interest, or logistical overhead to actually accept "crypto" (or cash) without "parasitic middlemen". This is why Coinbase, BitGo, et al. are very successful in this area, and account for virtually all cryptocurrency commerce. The function of Coinbase or BitGo is not parasitic; no business wants to cope with the arduous requirements to be able to accept and store cryptocurrencies.
KaoruAoiShiho 8y ago
This is the best thing that could've happened to them. Otherwise I would've never heard of Bitchute, now they're going to be famous.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- cannedslime 8y ago
  Yeah, because that totally happened last time bitchute got screwed over by a payment vendor (paypal)
empath75 8y ago
Free speech means no one is forced to do business with nazis.
- dmerfield 8y ago
  No it doesn’t. Free speech means allowing nazis to express themselves so you and others can understand nazism. If you’re genuinely interested in understanding the principle of free speech, I recommend this as an introduction: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/
  - jarfil 8y ago
    Yes it does. Free speech means not stopping Nazis from expressing themselves, it doesn't mean you have to help them express themselves. If you want to express something I don't like, then I'm not gonna try to silence you, but other than that you're on your own.
    - ComputerGuru 8y ago
      > Yes it does. Free speech means not stopping Nazis from expressing themselves, it doesn't mean you have to help them express themselves. I'm sorry, but I don't see where @dmerfield says what you are arguing against. Quoting @dmerfild for posterity: > No it doesn’t. Free speech means allowing nazis to express themselves so you and others can understand nazism. --- Interestingly, in most of Europe, "Free Speech" does not include this right. It is pretty uniquely American.
      - jarfil 8y ago
        Let's also quote @empath75 which @dmerfild is answering to: > Free speech means no one is forced to do business with nazis.
      - jstanley 8y ago
        Right, but the "Ministry of Truth" isn't about truth either. Actual free speech would, quite obviously, not depend on the content of the speech.
CM30 8y ago
This is a great example of how 'just set up your own platform' may not be the best solution to issues of censorship and what not. Because if you do, then the platforms you need for things like payment processing are also likely to ban your service for much the same reasons as before, and neutral alternatives to them are few and far between. Still, I guess this does provide a good use case for cryptocurrencies and what not.
- buboard 8y ago
  but they didn't set up their own platform, instead they relied on patreon.
  - justAnotherNET 8y ago
    The platform they were attempting to replace is youtube. How do you replace one platform when all the others conspire to prevent you from doing so? You can't just bootstrap your own internet... at some level you're using other's stuff
  - bdcravens 8y ago
    I believe "platform" in this context refers to the content platform. (just a fancy way of saying host your own website instead of distributing via Youtube) edit: Looks like they're more than just a "website", but both this site and the platform site really don't do a good job of explaining that.
    - buboard 8y ago
      the platform is incomplete. It's pretty obvious nowadays that any platform that makes free speech its main selling point will be ousted by every payment processor.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - cft 8y ago
    They did not lay their own fiber either. Where do you draw that boundary?
signet 8y ago
Pretty sure they were banned for taking on a public political stance supporting disinformation peddlers like Alex Jones. Payment processers don't want to be associated with this kind of content for obvious reasons.
- colordrops 8y ago
  What are the obvious reasons?
  - tw04 8y ago
    Why don't payment processors want to be associated with someone calling for violence in the streets while peddling conspiracy theories they know to be untrue? Isn't that pretty self explanatory...?
    - shard972 8y ago
      And yet CNN or MSNBC isn't banned from any payment platforms for giving platforms to people calling for violence in the streets. Hell, antifa have a patreon account and they are classified a terrorist organisation by the US government https://www.patreon.com/intlantifadefence https://www.patreon.com/intlantifadefence Has alex jones been classified a domestic terrorist? Is infowars a domestic terrorist organisation?
      - danso 8y ago
        > Hell, antifa have a patreon account and they are classified a terrorist organisation by the US government Source?
  - drivingmenuts 8y ago
    > What are the obvious reasons? Really? OK, how about this: he's a polarizing nutcase who has adopted controversial and unsupportable standings on several calamitous events in the past two decades. Most people that see a mainstream business supporting him assume that business adopts those same ideas, rightly or wrongly. So, the perception of supporting Alex Jones can be incredibly damaging to the reputation of a business.
Joeboy 8y ago
Would anybody like to fill us in on what BitChute is, in theory and / or in practice?
- Izkata 8y ago
  It's a decentralized YouTube alternative.
  - how_to_bake 8y ago
    I'm just going to leave a PeerTube link here as I think it is a better example of a decentralized youtube. https://joinpeertube.org/ https://joinpeertube.org/ BitChute annoys me because the video streaming is decentralized through bittorrent tech, but the repository of videos is totally dependent and centralized with BitChute.
- notafraudster 8y ago
  BitChute is a YouTube replacement made for people who are "Very Worried About YouTube's Censorship". It uses WebTorrent for distribution to solve the upfront server costs of running a video service. Cute idea. You might imagine that with how endemic some people allege YouTube's censorship is, there would be a variety of interesting and censored content on BitChute. Which is why when you check the front page you get and click popular you get... FOX News clips for posting on Voat (a far-right reddit clone), conspiracy theories about the magnetic poles, conspiracy theories about the Mueller investigation, conspiracy theories about the Mexican border, a far-right news source complaining about Jeff Flake, neo-nazi videos, Brazilian spam, anti-semitism, people complaining about YouTube censorship, etc.
  - AnaniasAnanas 8y ago
    > a far-right reddit clone I was under the impression that voat was created due to censorship that reddit applied on all kinds of things, including anime porn for example. Not exclusively for far-right content. I certainly do not doubt that most of bitchute's or voat's users are far-right however. It only makes sense that the groups that are censored from other platforms move to censorship-free* alternatives. That being said it would be great to see other creators who have suffered by youtube's content-id system move to decentralized and censorship-resistant alternatives. * I do doubt that it is fully censorship free still. Chances are that they are willing to take down copyrighted content from their site for example, even if they can't affect the webtorrent distirbution.
orf 8y ago
As always, seems to be full of right-wing anti-semitism, fake news and outlandish conservative conspiracy theories. Just check the 'popular' tab: "Welcome to "Your" Zionist Occupied Government", "EXPOSED: Jewish Donors Granted "Access To NYPD HQ", "How the Globalists Stole Our Home". All uploaded within the last hour. - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/white-genocide/ https://www.bitchute.com/channel/white-genocide/ - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/zionistreport/ https://www.bitchute.com/channel/zionistreport/ - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/wayoftheworld/ https://www.bitchute.com/channel/wayoftheworld/
- justAnotherNET 8y ago
  It's kind of funny, but your position (and other experiences with uncensored platforms) suggests that left wing ideas can only prosper when supported by censorship and thought supression.
- userbinator 8y ago
  Any service that strongly supports free speech will naturally attract the extremists which have been displaced from elsewhere. Right or left doesn't matter, it's just the result of the current political climate.
  - TheForumTroll 8y ago
    Then the right should have no need to use the service?
  - spookthesunset 8y ago
    > It's just the result of the current political climate. It has nothing to do with the "political climate". It has everything to do with the fact most people don't want to listen nut-jobs all day. In fact, in a free market it would appear people seem to prefer platforms that banish the nut jobs.
    - dreta 8y ago
      it has everything to do with the current political climate, and the fact that extremist views on one side are tolerated, while ones on the other are actively being fought against if you don't want to listen to "nut jobs", you don't have to, nobody's shoving Alex Jones in your face, but banning people you find objectionable sets up a dangerous precedent
AlwaysBCoding 8y ago
This is the interview with Patreon CEO Jack Conte alluded to in the blog post. It's really extraordinary to watch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofpbDgCj9rw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofpbDgCj9rw
- simonebrunozzi 8y ago
  It's about 70 minutes; I would really appreciate if you could provide a TL;DR of why you think it's extraordinary, before digging in. Thanks!
egypturnash 8y ago
What is BitChute and why should I care that it's being suspended by Patreon? If I go to the front page of this site I just see a default Wordpress sidebar; there is one post that shows upon the front page, and it is password protected.
- buboard 8y ago
  you re looking for http://bitchute.com http://bitchute.com
cookiecaper 8y ago
The problem with any platform that bills itself as "uncensorable" is that it will always attract the people that everyone else wants to keep as far away from them as possible. The repulsion people feel for those "deplorables", for lack of a better term, easily and automatically transfers to any platform that appears to tolerate them. For this type of platform to succeed it must focus on self-replication rather than too-big-to-fail uncensorability, propagating through a hydra effect that makes it easy to clone and re-spin when major hubs get brought down. This is basically what happened with BitTorrent. The trackers and indexes come and go, as whenever one obtains too much prominence the hammer comes down, but the core platform remains and it's reasonably easy for any interested party to pick up the pieces. If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. As they obtained mainstream acceptance, they'd be able to focus on developing the resiliency and portability of the underlying technology. With some work into ensuring this tech becomes known and depended upon primarily for its association with positive things, associations with undesirables can be written off as an unintended side effect, but the ultimate outcome would still be free publication without requiring the control or approval of any breed of censorious supervisor. Not unlike the internet itself, really.
- jstanley 8y ago
  > If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. What's the appeal to users of a more inconvenient version of YouTube that has even more draconian moderation policies? The appeal of BitChute is precisely its lack of censorship.
- Yetanfou 8y ago
  > If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. You'd first have to define controversial, a difficult task when dealing with the 'net: * Communism - fine in Sweden, frowned upon in former Soviet satellite states * Marihuana - forbidden in Sweden, allowed in Canada and parts of the US, tolerated in the Netherlands * Women in revealing clothing - fine in western Europe, forbidden in islamic countries (for a recent example see [1]) * Antisemitism - forbidden in most of western Europe, daily fare on TV in many islamic countries * ... This list goes on, where do you draw the line? It would end up being a very bland service when everyone who is even slightly controversial is kicked off. So bland, actually, that the service would never obtain mainstream acceptance. [1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/01/egyptian-actress-charged-obscene-act-wearing-revealing-dress/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/01/egyptian-actress... - not exactly revealing to 'western' standards, enough for 5 years in prison according to the Egyptian prosecutor
ComputerGuru 8y ago
I don't understand why BitChute can't moderate how the site itself appears to the casual viewer without sacrificing Free Speech. Free Speech does not mean they have to promote the content that is uploaded, only that they do not censor it. Allow conspiracy theorists and extremists (right or left) to post what they want.. but you don't have to feature all recent uploads on the front page. You actually don't have to feature popular or recent uploads on the front page at all.
- buboard 8y ago
  that would probably not have much effect, i guess most of their traffic comes from other social channels.
- Chris_Chambers 8y ago
  If it bothers you so much then you should just leave it and build your own platform.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > I don't understand why BitChute can't moderate how the site itself appears to the casual viewer without sacrificing Free Speech. When you decide that a private platform deciding what is acceptable and worthy of promotion on their own platform violates free speech (which is the basis for the “free speech” challenge against YouTube that justifies BitChute), then exercising editorial control of what is given prominent placement on your own platform would be a violation. So, yeah, they are being consistent with their own (boneheaded) concept of free speech when they are hands off with their platform recommendations.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
woolvalley 8y ago
Even if patreon & friends are ok with it, they still need to avoid businesses that visa & friends do not want on their payment networks or will only allow them for a large cost. And by derivative what major regulators do not want on payment & banking systems or without a lot of onerous paperwork and gotchas. The classic example in this is porn, and now it's fringe right wing things.
- shard972 8y ago
  > The classic example in this is porn, and now it's fringe right wing things. Consider that porn was gone after and deplatformed because of it's legal grey area in many jurisdictions. I guess that means right wing things are now up to be declared illegal now?
  - scrollaway 8y ago
    What? No. Porn is the lifeblood of many industries. The problem with porn is two-fold: - Some classes of advertisers don't like it (don't want their ads associated with porn). Removing porn from your platform might be necessary depending on your business model and target audience. - Websites that will commonly have minors will usually avoid the risk and outright ban porn. Still, it's not like they wouldn't take it if they could. Steam for example has recently started approving porn games.
    - woolvalley 8y ago
      Also a history of much higher rates of fraud and chargeback risk.
motohagiography 8y ago
Payment processing is so heavily regulated and dependent on networks, it's hard to make the case that they are a normal businesses. When you have KYC obligations, you have to collect intelligence on your customers and supply it to the government, and that's not something a hotdog stand or a bookstore needs to do. Payment companies are different. Patreon may well be within its rights and contracts to sabotage business partners it disagrees with, but the artificial barrier to market entry of a license for processing payments makes their righteous posturing a bit vainglorious. I get these people don't do principle, but it's worth considering the broader impact of dispensing with it.
ctyptopat08 8y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=ctyptopat08 https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=ctyptopat08

93 points by randomname2 8y ago

Operation Choke Point still going strong, I see.

"just build your own platform" The good news is that the continued censorship will fuel adoption of crypto and speed up the demise of parasitic middlemen who take a cut off every transaction

buboard 8y ago
wishful thinking, unfortunately
- beginningguava 8y ago
  Once upon a time people wondered why people would do online shopping or use credit cards when cash got the job done. Crypto will eventually become the most logical option for most companies, it won't happen over night but it will eventually. Accept payment in any cryptocurrency and then convert them to a stablecoin so you aren't affected by price changes due to speculation
  - pixxel 8y ago
    Indeed. I think credit cards took some 40 years to become mainstream.
  - buboard 8y ago
    as others have pointed out, the problem of accounting/taxation is important to solve before cryptos can become the cash of the web. and it might not be solvable
    - russdpale 8y ago
      Our current financial system has taken 1000 years to formulate into what we know today. People are impatient.
to_bpr 8y ago
Given the current climate where vast swathes of people actively support and encourage this type of de-platforming and censorship, I believe it's far more likely that we'll find ourselves in a situation akin to those in China than the libertarian paradise you've alluded to. Edit: Silently downvoted, no disagreement voiced. Welcome to the new Reddit.
- spookthesunset 8y ago
  > de-platforming God forbid the vast majority of people in the world don't want to listen to a bunch of racist nut jobs ramble on about various ill founded conspiracy theories.
  - erik_seaberg 8y ago
    Maybe they're only burning the bad books, but I wouldn't bet on that.
    - spookthesunset 8y ago
      I don't see any jack booted government goons walking around burning books, do you? I just see a private company choosing to not do business with another private company. Isn't that what the whole "free market" thing supposed to be about?
iamnothere 8y ago
Unfortunately it is not clear that crypto will be able to prevent this. To allow for participation from people in the legacy economy, at some point an exchange between cash and crypto must be made. This is the weak point that can be easily attacked by governments and the banking oligarchy. Additionally, if disfavored entities begin using crypto and thriving on it, the government will simply find an excuse to sieze it under money laundering or terrorism laws, or will make something else up on the spot. Look at what happened to the Liberty Dollar for an example of what can happen to alt currencies when they start to gain real traction. Remember, all that you have to do is make alt currencies inconvenient enough to use for normal payment needs, and this will discourage people from getting involved. Lower participation deprives the alt economy of goods, services, and the ability to exchange currency for "real" cash. That doesn't mean that crypto is totally useless, just pointing out that there is not a technical "silver bullet" solution to this problem. Technical solutions must be part of the answer, but these must be backed by political force.
raverbashing 8y ago
Bitcoin is busy shooting themselves in the foot. Can't wait for a better alternative to really take off.
way2983 8y ago
>fuel adoption of crypto and speed up the demise of parasitic middlemen who take a cut off every transaction Most business owners do not have the technical ability, interest, or logistical overhead to actually accept "crypto" (or cash) without "parasitic middlemen". This is why Coinbase, BitGo, et al. are very successful in this area, and account for virtually all cryptocurrency commerce. The function of Coinbase or BitGo is not parasitic; no business wants to cope with the arduous requirements to be able to accept and store cryptocurrencies.

KaoruAoiShiho 8y ago

This is the best thing that could've happened to them. Otherwise I would've never heard of Bitchute, now they're going to be famous.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
cannedslime 8y ago
Yeah, because that totally happened last time bitchute got screwed over by a payment vendor (paypal)

empath75 8y ago

Free speech means no one is forced to do business with nazis.

dmerfield 8y ago
No it doesn’t. Free speech means allowing nazis to express themselves so you and others can understand nazism. If you’re genuinely interested in understanding the principle of free speech, I recommend this as an introduction: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/
- jarfil 8y ago
  Yes it does. Free speech means not stopping Nazis from expressing themselves, it doesn't mean you have to help them express themselves. If you want to express something I don't like, then I'm not gonna try to silence you, but other than that you're on your own.
  - ComputerGuru 8y ago
    > Yes it does. Free speech means not stopping Nazis from expressing themselves, it doesn't mean you have to help them express themselves. I'm sorry, but I don't see where @dmerfield says what you are arguing against. Quoting @dmerfild for posterity: > No it doesn’t. Free speech means allowing nazis to express themselves so you and others can understand nazism. --- Interestingly, in most of Europe, "Free Speech" does not include this right. It is pretty uniquely American.
    - jarfil 8y ago
      Let's also quote @empath75 which @dmerfild is answering to: > Free speech means no one is forced to do business with nazis.
    - jstanley 8y ago
      Right, but the "Ministry of Truth" isn't about truth either. Actual free speech would, quite obviously, not depend on the content of the speech.

CM30 8y ago

This is a great example of how 'just set up your own platform' may not be the best solution to issues of censorship and what not. Because if you do, then the platforms you need for things like payment processing are also likely to ban your service for much the same reasons as before, and neutral alternatives to them are few and far between. Still, I guess this does provide a good use case for cryptocurrencies and what not.

buboard 8y ago
but they didn't set up their own platform, instead they relied on patreon.
- justAnotherNET 8y ago
  The platform they were attempting to replace is youtube. How do you replace one platform when all the others conspire to prevent you from doing so? You can't just bootstrap your own internet... at some level you're using other's stuff
- bdcravens 8y ago
  I believe "platform" in this context refers to the content platform. (just a fancy way of saying host your own website instead of distributing via Youtube) edit: Looks like they're more than just a "website", but both this site and the platform site really don't do a good job of explaining that.
  - buboard 8y ago
    the platform is incomplete. It's pretty obvious nowadays that any platform that makes free speech its main selling point will be ousted by every payment processor.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- cft 8y ago
  They did not lay their own fiber either. Where do you draw that boundary?

signet 8y ago

Pretty sure they were banned for taking on a public political stance supporting disinformation peddlers like Alex Jones. Payment processers don't want to be associated with this kind of content for obvious reasons.

colordrops 8y ago
What are the obvious reasons?
- tw04 8y ago
  Why don't payment processors want to be associated with someone calling for violence in the streets while peddling conspiracy theories they know to be untrue? Isn't that pretty self explanatory...?
  - shard972 8y ago
    And yet CNN or MSNBC isn't banned from any payment platforms for giving platforms to people calling for violence in the streets. Hell, antifa have a patreon account and they are classified a terrorist organisation by the US government https://www.patreon.com/intlantifadefence https://www.patreon.com/intlantifadefence Has alex jones been classified a domestic terrorist? Is infowars a domestic terrorist organisation?
    - danso 8y ago
      > Hell, antifa have a patreon account and they are classified a terrorist organisation by the US government Source?
- drivingmenuts 8y ago
  > What are the obvious reasons? Really? OK, how about this: he's a polarizing nutcase who has adopted controversial and unsupportable standings on several calamitous events in the past two decades. Most people that see a mainstream business supporting him assume that business adopts those same ideas, rightly or wrongly. So, the perception of supporting Alex Jones can be incredibly damaging to the reputation of a business.

Joeboy 8y ago

Would anybody like to fill us in on what BitChute is, in theory and / or in practice?

Izkata 8y ago
It's a decentralized YouTube alternative.
- how_to_bake 8y ago
  I'm just going to leave a PeerTube link here as I think it is a better example of a decentralized youtube. https://joinpeertube.org/ https://joinpeertube.org/ BitChute annoys me because the video streaming is decentralized through bittorrent tech, but the repository of videos is totally dependent and centralized with BitChute.
notafraudster 8y ago
BitChute is a YouTube replacement made for people who are "Very Worried About YouTube's Censorship". It uses WebTorrent for distribution to solve the upfront server costs of running a video service. Cute idea. You might imagine that with how endemic some people allege YouTube's censorship is, there would be a variety of interesting and censored content on BitChute. Which is why when you check the front page you get and click popular you get... FOX News clips for posting on Voat (a far-right reddit clone), conspiracy theories about the magnetic poles, conspiracy theories about the Mueller investigation, conspiracy theories about the Mexican border, a far-right news source complaining about Jeff Flake, neo-nazi videos, Brazilian spam, anti-semitism, people complaining about YouTube censorship, etc.
- AnaniasAnanas 8y ago
  > a far-right reddit clone I was under the impression that voat was created due to censorship that reddit applied on all kinds of things, including anime porn for example. Not exclusively for far-right content. I certainly do not doubt that most of bitchute's or voat's users are far-right however. It only makes sense that the groups that are censored from other platforms move to censorship-free* alternatives. That being said it would be great to see other creators who have suffered by youtube's content-id system move to decentralized and censorship-resistant alternatives. * I do doubt that it is fully censorship free still. Chances are that they are willing to take down copyrighted content from their site for example, even if they can't affect the webtorrent distirbution.

orf 8y ago

As always, seems to be full of right-wing anti-semitism, fake news and outlandish conservative conspiracy theories. Just check the 'popular' tab: "Welcome to "Your" Zionist Occupied Government", "EXPOSED: Jewish Donors Granted "Access To NYPD HQ", "How the Globalists Stole Our Home". All uploaded within the last hour. - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/white-genocide/ https://www.bitchute.com/channel/white-genocide/ - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/zionistreport/ https://www.bitchute.com/channel/zionistreport/ - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/wayoftheworld/ https://www.bitchute.com/channel/wayoftheworld/

justAnotherNET 8y ago
It's kind of funny, but your position (and other experiences with uncensored platforms) suggests that left wing ideas can only prosper when supported by censorship and thought supression.
userbinator 8y ago
Any service that strongly supports free speech will naturally attract the extremists which have been displaced from elsewhere. Right or left doesn't matter, it's just the result of the current political climate.
- TheForumTroll 8y ago
  Then the right should have no need to use the service?
- spookthesunset 8y ago
  > It's just the result of the current political climate. It has nothing to do with the "political climate". It has everything to do with the fact most people don't want to listen nut-jobs all day. In fact, in a free market it would appear people seem to prefer platforms that banish the nut jobs.
  - dreta 8y ago
    it has everything to do with the current political climate, and the fact that extremist views on one side are tolerated, while ones on the other are actively being fought against if you don't want to listen to "nut jobs", you don't have to, nobody's shoving Alex Jones in your face, but banning people you find objectionable sets up a dangerous precedent

AlwaysBCoding 8y ago

This is the interview with Patreon CEO Jack Conte alluded to in the blog post. It's really extraordinary to watch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofpbDgCj9rw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofpbDgCj9rw

simonebrunozzi 8y ago
It's about 70 minutes; I would really appreciate if you could provide a TL;DR of why you think it's extraordinary, before digging in. Thanks!

egypturnash 8y ago

What is BitChute and why should I care that it's being suspended by Patreon? If I go to the front page of this site I just see a default Wordpress sidebar; there is one post that shows upon the front page, and it is password protected.

buboard 8y ago
you re looking for http://bitchute.com http://bitchute.com

cookiecaper 8y ago

The problem with any platform that bills itself as "uncensorable" is that it will always attract the people that everyone else wants to keep as far away from them as possible. The repulsion people feel for those "deplorables", for lack of a better term, easily and automatically transfers to any platform that appears to tolerate them. For this type of platform to succeed it must focus on self-replication rather than too-big-to-fail uncensorability, propagating through a hydra effect that makes it easy to clone and re-spin when major hubs get brought down. This is basically what happened with BitTorrent. The trackers and indexes come and go, as whenever one obtains too much prominence the hammer comes down, but the core platform remains and it's reasonably easy for any interested party to pick up the pieces. If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. As they obtained mainstream acceptance, they'd be able to focus on developing the resiliency and portability of the underlying technology. With some work into ensuring this tech becomes known and depended upon primarily for its association with positive things, associations with undesirables can be written off as an unintended side effect, but the ultimate outcome would still be free publication without requiring the control or approval of any breed of censorious supervisor. Not unlike the internet itself, really.

jstanley 8y ago
> If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. What's the appeal to users of a more inconvenient version of YouTube that has even more draconian moderation policies? The appeal of BitChute is precisely its lack of censorship.
Yetanfou 8y ago
> If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. You'd first have to define controversial, a difficult task when dealing with the 'net: * Communism - fine in Sweden, frowned upon in former Soviet satellite states * Marihuana - forbidden in Sweden, allowed in Canada and parts of the US, tolerated in the Netherlands * Women in revealing clothing - fine in western Europe, forbidden in islamic countries (for a recent example see [1]) * Antisemitism - forbidden in most of western Europe, daily fare on TV in many islamic countries * ... This list goes on, where do you draw the line? It would end up being a very bland service when everyone who is even slightly controversial is kicked off. So bland, actually, that the service would never obtain mainstream acceptance. [1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/01/egyptian-actress-charged-obscene-act-wearing-revealing-dress/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/01/egyptian-actress... - not exactly revealing to 'western' standards, enough for 5 years in prison according to the Egyptian prosecutor

ComputerGuru 8y ago

I don't understand why BitChute can't moderate how the site itself appears to the casual viewer without sacrificing Free Speech. Free Speech does not mean they have to promote the content that is uploaded, only that they do not censor it. Allow conspiracy theorists and extremists (right or left) to post what they want.. but you don't have to feature all recent uploads on the front page. You actually don't have to feature popular or recent uploads on the front page at all.

buboard 8y ago
that would probably not have much effect, i guess most of their traffic comes from other social channels.
Chris_Chambers 8y ago
If it bothers you so much then you should just leave it and build your own platform.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> I don't understand why BitChute can't moderate how the site itself appears to the casual viewer without sacrificing Free Speech. When you decide that a private platform deciding what is acceptable and worthy of promotion on their own platform violates free speech (which is the basis for the “free speech” challenge against YouTube that justifies BitChute), then exercising editorial control of what is given prominent placement on your own platform would be a violation. So, yeah, they are being consistent with their own (boneheaded) concept of free speech when they are hands off with their platform recommendations.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

woolvalley 8y ago

Even if patreon & friends are ok with it, they still need to avoid businesses that visa & friends do not want on their payment networks or will only allow them for a large cost. And by derivative what major regulators do not want on payment & banking systems or without a lot of onerous paperwork and gotchas. The classic example in this is porn, and now it's fringe right wing things.

shard972 8y ago
> The classic example in this is porn, and now it's fringe right wing things. Consider that porn was gone after and deplatformed because of it's legal grey area in many jurisdictions. I guess that means right wing things are now up to be declared illegal now?
- scrollaway 8y ago
  What? No. Porn is the lifeblood of many industries. The problem with porn is two-fold: - Some classes of advertisers don't like it (don't want their ads associated with porn). Removing porn from your platform might be necessary depending on your business model and target audience. - Websites that will commonly have minors will usually avoid the risk and outright ban porn. Still, it's not like they wouldn't take it if they could. Steam for example has recently started approving porn games.
  - woolvalley 8y ago
    Also a history of much higher rates of fraud and chargeback risk.

motohagiography 8y ago

Payment processing is so heavily regulated and dependent on networks, it's hard to make the case that they are a normal businesses. When you have KYC obligations, you have to collect intelligence on your customers and supply it to the government, and that's not something a hotdog stand or a bookstore needs to do. Payment companies are different. Patreon may well be within its rights and contracts to sabotage business partners it disagrees with, but the artificial barrier to market entry of a license for processing payments makes their righteous posturing a bit vainglorious. I get these people don't do principle, but it's worth considering the broader impact of dispensing with it.

ctyptopat08 8y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=ctyptopat08 https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=ctyptopat08