3 ms·

> Who do you mean by “we” when suggesting stricter standards? "We” are human beings who are born free and equal in dignity and rights. > How does that work? N

> Who do you mean by “we” when suggesting stricter standards? "We” are human beings who are born free and equal in dignity and rights. > How does that work? Nationalize Google? Social expectations, social awareness, legal means. It would work like all other customs and laws work: you get socially shunned and get legal trouble for your actions that don’t meet social expectations. Try to open a bar that doesn’t allow black people to enter it to see how those mechanisms work in practice.

gregjor 3y ago
Good luck getting enough people to care about a celebrity cancellation. The only way to change the behavior of big corps like Google is not to give them money, and to get other people to do the same. I wouldn’t count on getting enough people worked up, though. Russell Brand has his rights intact for now. Any damage to his dignity he did himself. He doesn’t have the right to post on YouTube, and YT has every right to decide who and what gets on their platform. Don’t like it? Don’t use it.
- LudwigNagasena 3y ago
  It’s not just about celebrity cancellation. This is just another form of a bigger problem. For example, many people got their Google accounts blocked for no reason and no recourse. There are stories about it on HN. Yeah, LGBT rights and defunding police are more trendy issues to care about than the techno dystopia of tomorrow; but one doesn’t exclude the other. And hopefully the public sentiment will get there before it’s too late.
  - gregjor 3y ago
    Yeah, those "many people" blocked for "no reason." Google is free for most users. If they block someone from their services that's their prerogative. I doubt they do it randomly for "no reason," just like I doubt someone who says they got fired for "no reason." It might happen but more likely Google had a reason, just not one the blocked person agrees with or wants to tell anyone about. What happens on YouTube with the advertising policies hardly seems to rise to "techno dystopia of tomorrow." Russell Brand didn't have his Google or YouTube accounts blocked. His videos are still there. YouTube de-monetized his channel, which means they won't run ads on his videos, and Brand won't make money on YouTube. YouTube has obligations beyond Russell Brand's ego and income -- they have contractual obligations to their advertisers and all of their users. No one has to watch or post on YouTube, and we don't descend into a dystopian hellscape if YouTube does one thing or another -- if it disappeared tomorrow most people in the world would barely notice, and a few wealthy celebrities living parasitically off of attention and advertising would have to get real jobs.

gregjor 3y ago

Good luck getting enough people to care about a celebrity cancellation. The only way to change the behavior of big corps like Google is not to give them money, and to get other people to do the same. I wouldn’t count on getting enough people worked up, though. Russell Brand has his rights intact for now. Any damage to his dignity he did himself. He doesn’t have the right to post on YouTube, and YT has every right to decide who and what gets on their platform. Don’t like it? Don’t use it.

LudwigNagasena 3y ago
It’s not just about celebrity cancellation. This is just another form of a bigger problem. For example, many people got their Google accounts blocked for no reason and no recourse. There are stories about it on HN. Yeah, LGBT rights and defunding police are more trendy issues to care about than the techno dystopia of tomorrow; but one doesn’t exclude the other. And hopefully the public sentiment will get there before it’s too late.
- gregjor 3y ago
  Yeah, those "many people" blocked for "no reason." Google is free for most users. If they block someone from their services that's their prerogative. I doubt they do it randomly for "no reason," just like I doubt someone who says they got fired for "no reason." It might happen but more likely Google had a reason, just not one the blocked person agrees with or wants to tell anyone about. What happens on YouTube with the advertising policies hardly seems to rise to "techno dystopia of tomorrow." Russell Brand didn't have his Google or YouTube accounts blocked. His videos are still there. YouTube de-monetized his channel, which means they won't run ads on his videos, and Brand won't make money on YouTube. YouTube has obligations beyond Russell Brand's ego and income -- they have contractual obligations to their advertisers and all of their users. No one has to watch or post on YouTube, and we don't descend into a dystopian hellscape if YouTube does one thing or another -- if it disappeared tomorrow most people in the world would barely notice, and a few wealthy celebrities living parasitically off of attention and advertising would have to get real jobs.