4 ms·

So what is the activist political position on WPA2 vulnerabilities? You see what you want to see, but YouTube hosts an overwhelming abundance of evidence that

So what is the activist political position on WPA2 vulnerabilities? You see what you want to see, but YouTube hosts an overwhelming abundance of evidence that contradicts your claim.

im3w1l 6y ago
Internal employee pressure is the cause of some things getting removed, but they are not behind everything. In this particular case it might bdriven by legal concerns or something. But it should also be seen in light of the status quo. When censorship being the new default, then it doesn't take a strong reason to add another thing, such as hacking-adjacent content to the no-go pile. The code is already written, and the routines are well-known. There is no freedom-of-speech reputation left to protect. So the cost of removing this content is very low, lower than the legal risk.
- root_axis 6y ago
  Without any evidence this is just speculation. The reality is, there are many popular political YouTube channels that represent viewpoints all across the spectrum and this is an easily verifiable fact. I am yet to see any evidence that YouTube is motivated by anything other than money.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - im3w1l 6y ago
    I have seen evidence, but nothing I can share publicly.
tomschlick 6y ago
> So what is the activist political position on WPA2 vulnerabilities? Well we did just have a case with Twitter and IIRC Youtube where they redefined their "hacked material" policies to bend to the political will after the whole Hunter Biden laptop fiasco. So this may just be collateral damage due to those policy changes and the AI behind enforcing them.
int_19h 6y ago
The activist political position is that targeted hacking is a major political threat (DNC hacks etc). Thus, any material that sounds like it might be providing assistance to that is potentially politically volatile.

4 ms·

So what is the activist political position on WPA2 vulnerabilities? You see what you want to see, but YouTube hosts an overwhelming abundance of evidence that

by root_axis 6y ago

So what is the activist political position on WPA2 vulnerabilities? You see what you want to see, but YouTube hosts an overwhelming abundance of evidence that contradicts your claim.

im3w1l 6y ago
Internal employee pressure is the cause of some things getting removed, but they are not behind everything. In this particular case it might bdriven by legal concerns or something. But it should also be seen in light of the status quo. When censorship being the new default, then it doesn't take a strong reason to add another thing, such as hacking-adjacent content to the no-go pile. The code is already written, and the routines are well-known. There is no freedom-of-speech reputation left to protect. So the cost of removing this content is very low, lower than the legal risk.
- root_axis 6y ago
  Without any evidence this is just speculation. The reality is, there are many popular political YouTube channels that represent viewpoints all across the spectrum and this is an easily verifiable fact. I am yet to see any evidence that YouTube is motivated by anything other than money.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - im3w1l 6y ago
    I have seen evidence, but nothing I can share publicly.
tomschlick 6y ago
> So what is the activist political position on WPA2 vulnerabilities? Well we did just have a case with Twitter and IIRC Youtube where they redefined their "hacked material" policies to bend to the political will after the whole Hunter Biden laptop fiasco. So this may just be collateral damage due to those policy changes and the AI behind enforcing them.
int_19h 6y ago
The activist political position is that targeted hacking is a major political threat (DNC hacks etc). Thus, any material that sounds like it might be providing assistance to that is potentially politically volatile.