you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]jamesK_3rd 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

If you're hosting it on Google's servers, there's a strong case to be made that the material in question belongs to Google.

But not going down that road, there's an even stronger case that they have The right to censor items they host on your behalf, irrespective of the file ownership.

[–]Canbot[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The irony is that the leftists who support Google's tyranny are the first to accuse everyone else of fascism when they don't like their political views. They are the ones demanding that conservative speech be shut down by outside parties. I'm not demanding that the government step in and tell Google how to run their company, they just should not have all the special legal privileges of free and open platforms when they act like a publisher.

[–]jamesK_3rd 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I agree.

I also first think it's acceptable that google censor everything they want and more. I think it drives people away, and we aren't so far down the road where alternatives can't be created yet.

The political right does something similar to the left though. I hear over and over from a lot of these "conservatives" about how YouTube is censoring their speech or demonetizing them. I've heard excerpts from Glenn beck that talk about this and him demanding that they not be able to do that.

I completely disagree, nobody says you can make a living off YouTube. If they only want to monetize channels of cat videos or chics selling their bath water, that's on them. Nobody has a right to earn a living on YouTube as far as I'm concerned (other than YouTube of course) because it's their platform. Open source alternatives exist. And when someone else creates a channel that makes money, they will likely need to employ a sysadmin, a virtual host or buy their own hardware and support a local ISP etc.

There are alternatives to google. People crying about how bad they are seem like adults shitting themselves and then complaining that they've shit themselves while asking someone else to teach them top change their undies. I dunno dude, you're supposed be an adult, maybe do some adulting...

But The government shouldn't be giving any of these companies handouts or picking winners and losers. But they do, because the corporatist arm of the Republican party is every bit as bad as the corporatist arm of the DNC. And my guess is that when it comes to the socialism, they love their handout just as much as the average Democrat does.

[–]Isidend 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It should definitely be LEGAL to hide/edit/do whatever you want with your own website.

But I find it immoral and deceptive. You can't create a platform where "people are allowed to express their thoughts" and censor everything refuting the narrative...

[–]jamesK_3rd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree, but immoral and deceptive are relative now, in the same way you can teach your kid that boys can be girls if they feel like it is totally acceptable. YouTube and Google are bait and switch hot garbage. Stay away from them.

I've declined jobs before because of the "no compete" clause in the contract. My current employer erased that for me to get me to sign with them. I'd rather stock shelves with covid at Wall Mart and feel as if I'm free rather than be beholden to these scumbags.

And they'd probably argue that you creating a website on their platform gives them some say in the content. That's all arguments for lawyers to figure out. Don't give any money to any scumbag i say.