Post: #26

Styx is one of the few who has been extremely correct about what is happening, and predicted that this kind of attack was imminent....and that would be directed against EVERYONE who is competing with the legacy media.

Notably, progressive sites (the kind run by actual progressives, not neocon shills with identity politics) like TheInterecept are also coming under more aggressive media attack the past month or so

What this means is that they're panicking because it means they're losing the battle.

Post: #27

(03-03-2018 07:37 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Any serious threat to Youtube will simply have their app tossed out of GooglePlay and the AppleStore. The grounds will be "does not do enough to protect users from hatespeech".

The tech monopolies get broken up with anti-trust suits or they dominate forever.

There will be no serious grassroots competition while the hardware is fundamentally intertwined with the software for the average schmuck pulling a phone off a shelf at Kmart, jamming a sim card in it and wanting to watch funny dog videos.

That is what happened to GAB with Apple.

Post: #28

(03-03-2018 11:26 AM)Thersites Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 07:24 AM)Malone Wrote:  The only thing that can kill YT right now is itself.

More specifically when YT kills itself when it becomes full blown echo chamber of SJWism and incompetence. It current success comes from its ease of use, popularity and ad revenue it gives to its creators to help make more content. YT will destroy itself regardless of the warning put out by the creators on the website as they plead with management at its current trajectory.

I'm not expecting Kim to roll out anything in the near future or go through with his threat of making a new site. Its wishful thinking on my part for me to get a laugh. If he has all the parts available to make an easy to use website similar to YT, he maybe able to pull it off. Maybe.

A big part of the problem is advertising. Advertising on the internet is literally controlled by Google and Facebook, who have eaten any competitors and are relentless in destroying any potential threats to their duopoly. Since almost all internet platforms are ad supported, this gives them power of the purse over everything you see. YouTube is already a money-losing enterprise (although, like Hollywood, I don't trust reports of precisely how unprofitable it is. YouTube likely earns a small profit for Google even if this is shuffled in to Google/Alphabet's other properties).

Regardless, how will another video-sharing site succeed? GAFA (Google/Amazon/Facebook/Apple) can simply pull the ads that power anything they don't like and kill off its profitability.

Post: #29

(03-03-2018 07:12 PM)Sidney Crosby Wrote:  Are there not any popular alternatives to youtube right now that aren't as leftist?

Roosh and others have started uploading copies to BitChute:

http://www.bitchute.com

Post: #30

This new thing also came up on my feed today:

https://github.com/FreeTubeApp/FreeTube

I have yet to use it, but may do so later.

Post: #31

(03-02-2018 10:27 PM)Tytalus Wrote:  Well... I think Im Going to move on to proton mail. And get rid of as many Google apps as I can.

It isn't even protest, it's self defense from future attacks.

Post: #32

https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones/status...1910991873
"The Alex Jones channel with billions of views is frozen. We have been told it will be deleted tomorrow and all 33 thousands videos will be erased. We just set up this new page subscribe if you want to see what the SPLC wants censored.."
Alex Jones channel is being deleted.

Post: #33

"A YouTube spokeswoman recently admitted that some videos were being removed in error, attributing it to teething problems caused by their recent hiring of 10,000 new human moderators.

“Newer members may misapply some of our policies resulting in mistaken removals” admitted the spokeswoman. “We’ll reinstate any videos that were removed in error.”"

Maybe if they didn't engage in such virulent discrimination against alternative viewpoints in hiring then their moderators wouldn't be so biased. On the other hand, this is probably exactly what they were intended/trained to do.

Post: #34

(03-03-2018 10:39 PM)AWright Wrote:  https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones/status...1910991873
"The Alex Jones channel with billions of views is frozen. We have been told it will be deleted tomorrow and all 33 thousands videos will be erased. We just set up this new page subscribe if you want to see what the SPLC wants censored.."
Alex Jones channel is being deleted.

Well now we know why Alex Jones was kow towing so bad on previous issues. They've had him by the balls the whole time.

Post: #35

Where is the DOJ? They should be breaking up the youtube monopoly.

Post: #36

No....this thing with Alex Jones is bizarre. He’s been free from any kind of censorship or serious attacks in stark contrast to people like Roosh, Milo, etc. almost so much so as to lend credence to him being controlled opposition or a useful idiot.

That all changed VERY fast the moment Infowars started attacking the Douglas school shooting narrative. It was like a switch got flipped overnights the moment they started digging on Hogg.

I wonder if that means they stepped on a rabbit hole that needs further exploring,

Post: #37

(03-03-2018 09:04 PM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 07:12 PM)Sidney Crosby Wrote:  Are there not any popular alternatives to youtube right now that aren't as leftist?

Roosh and others have started uploading copies to BitChute:

http://www.bitchute.com

These are valuable alternative options, but the term alternative in this case is not synonymous with equal. In pre-1990 terms it's the equivalent of being blacklisted by print media conglomerates and deciding to run your laser printer night and day to keep a few thousand people on snail-mail updates. In pre-2000 terms it's like having your web-site shut down and being forced to distribute your message through an extensive email list which can only grow by word of mouth.

What is genuinely needed is a landmark case through the SCOTUS that establishes whether places like Youtube are "First Ammendment Zones" or not. If not then that needs to be established firmly because Youtube wouldn't be able to have it both ways. If Youtube is not just a massive and ongoing open-mike night then they are fundamentally liable for every video posted, which should open them to roughly a metric shit-ton of slander suits.

Technically if some whack-job from Portland posts a video which levels slander against Roosh (for example) then Youtube is liable, since they specifically claim ownership of all content anyway and functionally they're the ones broadcasting it. It would be the equivalent of a free-to-air television station broadcasting a recording of a homeless man levelling slander against whoever and thinking they could wash their hands of it "because we're technically not an affiliate of that homeless man".

No dice. I think that the only power the little guys have to at least bring these digital megacorps to heel is to toss law-suits at them for everything.

Google has already been successfully sued for slander a number of times in many regions and districts because their search page turned up a result with associated text from some podunk blog that claimed "person x did y". It didn't matter that nobody at Google penned the article that the search engine dredged up. The words turned up on http://www.google.com/etcetcetc so Google was found liable, which is perfectly fair when you think about it.

If some podunk blogger wrote an article titled "Leonard D Neubache raped a dog" then nobody but the readership would see it. But Google allows for that podunk blog to spread slander merely by searching for "Leonard D Neubache" and even if nobody was searching for a dog-rape story, the first return on page one would be the words "Leonard D Neubache raped a dog".

This is a case where we need more law suits, not less. Death by a thousand cuts, even if the plaintiffs only break even. This is even open to serious abuse. Start an anonymous channel and spread slander on the back of a trending issue on behalf of your fellow thought-criminal, allowing them to instantly start litigation proceedings.

In time Google et al would be begging to fire their censors in return for First Amendment protections.

Post: #38

(03-03-2018 11:25 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  No....this thing with Alex Jones is bizarre. He’s been free from any kind of censorship or serious attacks in stark contrast to people like Roosh, Milo, etc. almost so much so as to lend credence to him being controlled opposition or a useful idiot.

That all changed VERY fast the moment Infowars started attacking the Douglas school shooting narrative. It was like a switch got flipped overnights the moment they started digging on Hogg.

I wonder if that means they stepped on a rabbit hole that needs further exploring,

Interesting observation. I don’t keep up with good ol’ AJ too much but a couple weeks ago (Here) I was very surprised to see the MSM virulently attacking the crisis actor conspiracy, to the point that I now believe it might carry some legitimacy where I didn’t consider it before. This coupled with the follow up of companies like Facebook cracking down on this “conspiracy” for the good of all these helpless people.

If this stuff didn’t matter they wouldn’t be giving away their position like this so readily. There are bigger fish to fry. In recent years the boldness of the elite has been staggering, largest of which is the migrant invasion of Europe. The fact that they are rushing is probably better for us in the long run but it still makes me nervous not knowing why.

Post: #39

(03-04-2018 12:16 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 09:04 PM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 07:12 PM)Sidney Crosby Wrote:  Are there not any popular alternatives to youtube right now that aren't as leftist?

Roosh and others have started uploading copies to BitChute:

http://www.bitchute.com

These are valuable alternative options, but the term alternative in this case is not synonymous with equal. In pre-1990 terms it's the equivalent of being blacklisted by print media conglomerates and deciding to run your laser printer night and day to keep a few thousand people on snail-mail updates. In pre-2000 terms it's like having your web-site shut down and being forced to distribute your message through an extensive email list which can only grow by word of mouth.

What is genuinely needed is a landmark case through the SCOTUS that establishes whether places like Youtube are "First Ammendment Zones" or not. If not then that needs to be established firmly because Youtube wouldn't be able to have it both ways. If Youtube is not just a massive and ongoing open-mike night then they are fundamentally liable for every video posted, which should open them to roughly a metric shit-ton of slander suits.

Technically if some whack-job from Portland posts a video which levels slander against Roosh (for example) then Youtube is liable, since they specifically claim ownership of all content anyway and functionally they're the ones broadcasting it. It would be the equivalent of a free-to-air television station broadcasting a recording of a homeless man levelling slander against whoever and thinking they could wash their hands of it "because we're technically not an affiliate of that homeless man".

No dice. I think that the only power the little guys have to at least bring these digital megacorps to heel is to toss law-suits at them for everything.

Google has already been successfully sued for slander a number of times in many regions and districts because their search page turned up a result with associated text from some podunk blog that claimed "person x did y". It didn't matter that nobody at Google penned the article that the search engine dredged up. The words turned up on http://www.google.com/etcetcetc so Google was found liable, which is perfectly fair when you think about it.

If some podunk blogger wrote an article titled "Leonard D Neubache raped a dog" then nobody but the readership would see it. But Google allows for that podunk blog to spread slander merely by searching for "Leonard D Neubache" and even if nobody was searching for a dog-rape story, the first return on page one would be the words "Leonard D Neubache raped a dog".

This is a case where we need more law suits, not less. Death by a thousand cuts, even if the plaintiffs only break even. This is even open to serious abuse. Start an anonymous channel and spread slander on the back of a trending issue on behalf of your fellow thought-criminal, allowing them to instantly start litigation proceedings.

In time Google et al would be begging to fire their censors in return for First Amendment protections.

Indeed. The Communications Decency Act section 230 protects websites such as YouTube from lawsuits so long as the proprieter is not taking an active role in editorializing the content of what is said. Since Google is now editorializing, they can and should be held liable.

Now the downside is that Google has a lot of lawyers so most suits against them would not be successful. It would take a coordinated barrage to really succeed against them. However, in a country full of activist judges I am sure there are enough who are hungry to stick it to the big dogs that they'd lose quite a bit in the defense.

Post: #40

Sargon's back and is saying it the takedown was most likely due to a secondary channel he had. He didn't fight some BS copyright claims a year ago.

It's a nice little reminder to keep things as separate as possible so you can't be taken down with a single blow.

Post: #41

That’s always what they claim.
The real reason they reinstate people is because the ban caused an outcry. Otherwise they don’t really give a shit whether or not it’s justified

Post: #42

(03-02-2018 06:21 AM)Gambler Wrote:  Who is this Sargon guy?

In the time it took you to type that, you could have googled him. Sorry to derail, but these kind of entitled comments really do my head in.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand...if even moderates like Sargon and Peterson are being fucked with, then it's only a matter of time before Roosh, Tommy Robinson etc will be gone. It's inevitable. If they're willing to get rid of Infowars, which brings insane amounts of traffic, they'll get rid of anyone. Google has become too powerful, like Aurini said, it's literally the hub of most people's online lives...everything is linked to that address/account. It's not just the right either, like someone above pointed out, people on the left are also being targeted. The problem we have is that we're fighting two problems = an ideological battle against globalism and all its offshoots, but also the cross-political battle against establishment media (who are now in bed with GoogleTubeBook).

Post: #43

While Sargon is back, it is only a matter of time until ALL WRONGTHINKERS WILL BE BANNED FROM USING THE INTERNET.

Google even closed the gmail account of Jordan Peterson and he had to sue to get it back - the people protested heavily and that probably swayed their decision quicker, but it is a very dangerous precedent.

Though I am not sure - whether they will close all venues any time soon. The reason for this is that the globalists then would not know exactly what people are thinking. Sure they can go through the metadata that your phone, TV and dishwasher listens to, but it is more interesting to them to find out what everyone really is willing to do. Closing all wrongthink accounts and all wrongthink comments would come at the price that people would go and start meeting in physical with large massive undercover groups forming and organizing into real movements.

I think that they are currently sort of balancing things by trying to warn the wrongthinkers while tightening the screws each year by a bit. Ultimately they will ban everything and a negative comment about our diverse feminazi austerity utopia will get you prison time, but we are not there yet.

Post: #44

This shit sends shivers down my spine.

Reminds me of this, except about a million times more terrifying and vomit-inducing.

Post: #45

Folks, this is why we need to aggressively push for alternatives (and they need to be utilized). Bitchute, Startmail, ProtonMail, Startpage, DuckDuckGo, Hooktube, SteemIt, Gab, CryptoCurrencies, Opera, Brave, etc. Hell, even an alternative internet like ZeroNet is starting to sound like a good idea.

If you become too reliant on centralization (or 1 app for all), you risk letting (((them))) having you by the balls because they will just infiltrate the top and be able to control all from there. Don't want (((them))) having control over everything: use alternatives. It is similar to dealing with the big corporations, in that you go local or go somewhere else. (((They))) win if you become apathetic.

Post: #46

(03-04-2018 09:19 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  While Sargon is back, it is only a matter of time until ALL WRONGTHINKERS WILL BE BANNED FROM USING THE INTERNET.

Google even closed the gmail account of Jordan Peterson and he had to sue to get it back - the people protested heavily and that probably swayed their decision quicker, but it is a very dangerous precedent.

Though I am not sure - whether they will close all venues any time soon. The reason for this is that the globalists then would not know exactly what people are thinking. Sure they can go through the metadata that your phone, TV and dishwasher listens to, but it is more interesting to them to find out what everyone really is willing to do. Closing all wrongthink accounts and all wrongthink comments would come at the price that people would go and start meeting in physical with large massive undercover groups forming and organizing into real movements.

I think that they are currently sort of balancing things by trying to warn the wrongthinkers while tightening the screws each year by a bit. Ultimately they will ban everything and a negative comment about our diverse feminazi austerity utopia will get you prison time, but we are not there yet.

It is too late for the (((globalists))) to play their balancing act. They had their chance to literally "fix the leaks" in the early 2000s and totally prevent dissention when mass adaptation of the Internet was coming into play. The best laid plans of mice and men fall apart when ignoring the X-Factors.

Even normies are starting to recognize that what is posted in Breitbart and InfoWars is more reliable than the legacy crap.

Post: #47

(03-04-2018 04:57 AM)NightVale Wrote:  Sargon's back and is saying it the takedown was most likely due to a secondary channel he had. He didn't fight some BS copyright claims a year ago.

It's a nice little reminder to keep things as separate as possible so you can't be taken down with a single blow.

There's absolutely no reason to speculate this at all. Sargon's account was targeted for removal. If you oppose the narrative you are being targeted, and it is only a matter of time. First they came for the shitposters.

Post: #48

"First they came for the Stormfags, and I said nothing because I wasn't a Stormfag..."

Post: #49

(03-04-2018 11:28 AM)RexImperator Wrote:  "First they came for the Stormfags, and I said nothing because I wasn't a Stormfag..."

Then they came for the Conservatives, and I said nothing because I wasn't a Conservative
Then they came for the Alt-Light, and I said nothing because I wasn't Alt-Light
Then they came for the Moderates, and I said nothing because I was not a Moderate
Then they came for me (the normie), and there was no one to speak for me

It all starts with one, it always does!

Post: #50

It would be a bad move by the globalists to go to such extreme censorship so quickly, not only is it going to add credence to the arguments of the oppostion it will cause a backlash of gargantuan effect. when your losing a game of chess you can't just throw your opponents pieces off the board, it doesn't work like that.