Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pongo

YouTube mystery ban on hacking videos has content creators puzzled

Recommended Posts

After reading this new piece last night I started to worry about Hak5 a bit. It seems YT has updated it's policy to ban/demonetize  "Instructional hacking and phishing: Showing users how to bypass secure computer systems or steal user credentials and personal data."

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/07/03/youtube_bans_hacking_videos/

It's a shame as some of the things I've gleaned from the content here has helped me rescue clients from various forms of file / account lock out situations. I don't think YT's policy is smart enough to differentiate between the various colors of hats that exist. Another side of the coin, how am I suppose to protect the users from themselves if I don't know what the current threats are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing puzzling about. If you've been on YT for longer than a few years and have glanced out beyond your own scene you will have seen that channels have been threatened with video deletion, suspensions and bannings for quite a long time. I can remember when they started attacking drug harm reduction videos back in 2015 and began silencing channels which were uploading trip reports, genuine videos I may add, which were not in any way harmful to the viewer. Much like a hacker showing how they hacked a computer in real time, these guys were uploading their experiences on psychedelics so that the wider world could get a sense of what the experience was like, at least to look at. They then went after videos which had ZERO filming of actual drugs or drug experiences and took down videos educating people on the risks taking psychedelics, purely because of the content and the choice of words in the video title. Certain content uploaders were changing their titles to avoid the algorithm ie "t!h!is is N0T a tr!p Re...Port! video".
The worst part of it all is how they can and will demonetize as many videos as they possibly can in order to get you to comply which for a person who relies on income from ads on YT is pretty harsh.

YouTube has long since been a sitting duck. Ever since they brought in monetization through ads they also welcomed in the long arm of the empires behind the advertisment industry which have A LOT of power considering they are responsible for pretty much all purchases made around the globe for household items, beer, cars, technology etc. The advertisement industry began to get mad at YT because their customers (big corporations) wanted to choose what adverts went on what videos. That meant that YT had to change their rules and start enforcing ways to change how adverts were placed which meant changing the content of videos on YouTube. It's mainly a slow process of letting big corporations define YT like they have defined television; by pushing out what they don't want and bringing in what they do want. It also tries in with those who are in government who lobby on behalf of these big corporations to have laws put into effect.

That's what happens when you get bankrolled by big industry.
The answer has long been decentralized CMS, like that of dark web marketplaces. No-one can in theory take down content because there is no authority in charge of the content in the first place, besides the guys who own the servers and they have historically kept their ends of the bargain for example you look at the timeline of active dark web services. Many simply get taken down by authorities and are not actually regulated by said authorities until the last minute. If there was a version of YT which was held within a space that could not be regulated by any overarching authority and was not funded or had any reason to be funded by big corporations who support, or are partnered with the government, videos like these would not be taken down, accounts deleted and/or suspended and videos demonetized. Sadly, the whole of the internet is going in this direction; towards a world similiar to that of Bitcoin and the dark web. When the protocol behind that fails, another one will be created, ad infinitum.

This is nothing new though. And if you ask the opinion of the finding fathers of the internet we know today, well, they are hardly happy about the repressive online world they see around them today but it has been something predicted as happening since the boom of the internet pre-millenium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Reading a bit further down, I believe its something about taking down "easily searchable" videos on Youtube relating to "hacking".

Quote

Similarly, he said, if he were to attempt to make a Wi-Fi penetration test video more easily discoverable via search, by adding a tag like "hack neighbors Wi-Fi," it would be demonetized (denied ad revenue) or taken down.

In my opinion, I think if its educational (enough) they wouldn't remove /ban the video/user(?) 🤷‍♂️ ; but if YouTube (Google) wants to remove all-sorts of content relating to "Hacking" then big brother must be seriously raging 😒

*Isn't that violating first amendment? >.> *I wonder if this is related to the incident when YouTube was shutdown ...

Edited by _0NiTy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, _0NiTy said:

*Isn't that violating first amendment? >.> *I wonder if this is related to the incident when YouTube was shutdown ...

Does  not apply in the slightest.

1) Youtube is a private company. They can block  whomever they want, for whatever reason they want.

2) Not all of Youtube is  based in the US, and US law does not apply to the majority of the planet.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have assumed our "rights" would have applied for US (.com) YouTube, is what I actually meant but doesn't seem to be the case because they're a privately owned company (lol?).

Yep. Definitely sounds like big brother ops.

🤷‍♂️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2019 at 8:44 AM, Rkiver said:

Does  not apply in the slightest.

1) Youtube is a private company. They can block  whomever they want, for whatever reason they want.

2) Not all of Youtube is  based in the US, and US law does not apply to the majority of the planet.

the US first amendment only applies to the US government anyway... all it means is that no one can shut you up irl... not online

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...