You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: DTube 0.2: Faster to serve videos, Stronger to resist censorship
On Copyrighted and Extremist content:
I think it is best for this platform if we let this content exist in it's own bubble by filtering it by default, but not censoring it.
Due to the lopsidedness of the SP distribution it makes it very easy for one person or a small group of people to police opinions they personally don't agree with.
Down-voting will make steem a circle-jerk where only the most sanitary content can be rewarded. How boring will the content on steem be if we start forming down-voting brigades for anything slightly offensive?
Let's not ruin the ultimate censorship resistant platform by policing content we disagree with.
From a game theory standpoint, I actually disagree. With two different types of 'reactions' to a content, instead of one, it's much easier to control the quality.
Also, we want people to be fighting wars over which video will have the most exposure. That's what traditional medias already do. The difference here, is that the one with the most STEEM Power will win, instead of the one with the most dollars.
DTube is a decentralized gushing video stage connected to Steemit (the decentralized web-based social networking) which enables clients to transfer recordings effortlessly and profit (or cryptographic money) by means of the upvotes or likes on their post. As YouTube acquires the Anti-Defamation League to demonetize substance and mark it as "detest discourse", DTube couldn't have come at a superior time.
The Anti-Defamation League will have an even easier time censoring on DTube.
All it needs is to downvote any video it deems "antisemitic" (basically anything they don't like) to 0$ with the power of its jewish bankers backers.
Not to mention there is already a couple of zionist megawhales on Steemit which are downvoting any post questioning Jewish power, Haavara agreement, the bogus gas chambers, the Talmud, the Kalergi Plan etc etc
On Steemit a post only gets grayed out when downvoted to 0 (so it can't be fully censored), but on Dtube it will disappear completely! read what it says : "IF IT ENDS AT 0$ IT WON'T BE STORED"
all that is prevented is using SP to pay the hosting fees. You can still pay the hosting fees to ipfsstore directly, or host the content yourself.
yes I just read that in one of the replies. that's good. the cost is 0.044$ per GB per month.
Though I still don't see the need for the "downvote to 0= not stored" thing, unless it makes Dtube unsustainable financially.
@heimindanger in one of the replies revealed that illegal content can already be removed from ipfsstore whenever a Court order or DMCA notice is sent to them.
Also important will be to setup the nodes in countries that respect freespeech, because France (where @heimindanger is from) is a NWO socialist dictatorship with the strictest "hate speech" laws in the World lobbied by the Anti-Defamation League. Even just questioning the Holocaust gets you 5 years in jail there.
Don't know where @nannal is located but hopefully not in France, or best wait for the creation of nodes elsewhere.
Which political opinion goes to the top is not the issue. The issue is the censorship (aka removal of content). Even if heavily downvoted a video should NOT be deleted.
Dtube is not censorship resistant nor a free speech platform if all it takes to remove a video is downviting it to 0.
Wealthy Elites , Government Agencies or even political mobs will be able to remove inconvenient videos with ease.
There won't be any deletion. DTube can't remove links stored in the blockchain. In theory state actors may be able to pursue IPFS hosts, but it doesn't look like deletion will be an easy task.
if a video gets downvoted down to 0$ it won't be stored.
basically the ultimate censorship platform.
the wealthy elites and government agencies will be able to silence dissenters easier than ever before, they won't even have to wait for Goole...they'll be doing it themselves.
It's not exactly true, I think @heimindanger is just using simplified language here. Once a file is put up onto IPFS, there is nothing DTube can do to remove it. Once a link is placed in the Steem blockchain, there is nothing that DTube can do to remove it.
The particular code that is used on DTube can select not to show certain videos, based on whatever logic it wants, but it's just not presenting it, the data is there and it's still fully public. All you have to do is use an alternate client (perhaps simply a modified version of DTube, depending on the license) and you'll have full access to every video every uploaded via DTube.
then we need an alternative client unless @heimindanger reconsiders his "downvote to 0 censorship" stance.
Fighting wars over which content gets exposure is the exact situation i am afraid of:
Since both left leaning and right leaning groups can negate rewards, you are left with neutral white-washed content, no?
We are left with non-political content making all the money. Perfectly fine by my standards.
The STEEM blockchain will always print a certain amount of currency everyday. When you downvote someone for a full $, you literally give cents to all other authors in the trending, who legitimatly are better in your eyes.
It will be a problem for any content that is controversial, not necessarily just political content.
I'm only proposing we need to carve out a space for controversial content. If the masses of users don't see it unless they look for it (like on reddit), then this incentives the maximum amount of people to buy steem.
The alternative, is content contrary to the dominating ideology will be censored and people who want to support such content will be discouraged since their upvotes will be negated by larger accounts.
Ah you are comparing it to how reddit recently filtered some subs from appearing on the front page of the internet. Yes something like that could be possible, like making a greylist of tags like #nsfw, #gore, etc. Maybe logged in users should be able to setup their list of blocked tags though.
I thought it would be an opt in for the poster, something like:
The only way to censor content in a private tag would be if all witnesses decide to not write content from a certain private tag to the block-chain. So you would need 95% of the community to think the content is obscene rather than one person with an agenda before the content is banned.
Expanding on the idea: you could allow people to register, own, moderate, and collect the curation rewards from their owned private tags.
Without a hard-fork to implement private sub-reddit style tags, I suppose an option to not to have your content show on trending, and hope agenda driven down-voters don't bother you would be nice.
I am more than brilliant thanks for participating You really deserve success and I want to be like you and be happy if you followed me and I loved my publications love you
me too
Fuck your standards you fucking tool.... Time for a new video platform it seems.....
No No No, Controversy has value, if you seperate them everything will fall flat.
Good morning DonaldTrumpFan and anyone who reads this comment.
This is my very first interaction with Steemit since joining a few days ago. I couldn't resist this opportunity to add my voice to this crucial topic.
I despise Facebook, YouTube and Twitter because, more and more, they are used as tools to censor views that they deem unacceptable; particularly views that are labeled as: "conservative" or "right leaning" or "hate speech" or "politically incorrect" or islamophobic" or "homophobic" or "racist" or "anti-semitic" or "white-supremacist" or xenophobic" etc.
Let me be clear. There should be no safe haven for anyone that advocates treason and sedition against the United States whether they are American citizens or not. Videos supporting, depicting pornography and coaching viewers on how to do pornography or child molestation or rape or bomb making (you see where I am going with this). Why? Because these actions are against natural law not to mention the Law.
So, DonaldTrumpFan, I share your concerns and position on this matter of censorship.
I will say more in my introduction post on Steemit and in my Dtube posts and video uploads.
hahaha ut SP is just dollars, meaning anyone with DOLLARS can BUY and convert to SP.....
You are really awesome and your posts are awesome. Thanks for sharing. I want to be like you and succeed like you
I am very grateful to you
I will share your posts on my page. You are a hero
Yes but your going to run into the problem of fracturing with this and while that dose not seem like an issue platform dis-adoption at this early stage could happen as a result. In other words people will often choose to be in there own echo chamber/comfort zone rather than compete.
“If this nation is to be wise as well as strong, if we are to achieve our destiny, then we need more new ideas for more wise men reading more good books in more public libraries. These libraries should be open to all—except the censor. We must know all the facts and hear all the alternatives and listen to all the criticisms. Let us welcome controversial books and controversial authors. For the Bill of Rights is the guardian of our security as well as our liberty.
[Response to questionnaire in Saturday Review, October 29 1960]”
― John F. Kennedy
Note: The Steemit and Dtube’s of the world today are the open and public libraries of yesterday. There’s no coincidence that once you examine the etymology tree of both the words library and liberty, you find they originate from the Latin root word— liber, which translates as free.
I believe freedom exist first and foremost in the mind. Censorship and suppression are the harbingers of ignorance and slavery.
both the words library and liberty, you find they originate from the Latin root word— liber, which translates as free.
very nice observation
Thank you!
Sorry, but this is only partially correct.
liber as an adjective means free, this is correct. But the origin of library is the noun liber (book) which is used metonymically only. People used to write on bark, which is the correct translation of the noun liber. While this meaning of bark is related to trees and not to dogs, the meaning of library is related to bark and not to liberty...
Damn, langugages are difficult and confusing.
Awesome.
Makes me wonder if we could program an AI to make decisions like JFK would have... could be an interesting afterlife. Would be cool if it produced D-Tube videos as the product! "JFK on Censorship" then a video of a recreation of him, but with a new AI-created speech...
(We may all just be original content for future AI creations!?)
All the better if we each learn and speak with such authority. I've heard he had access to significant information, unlike many other leaders. Perhaps with the most complete data set, we make truly logical conclusions that help humanity.
I also disagree. It is this community's fear of the downvote which is allowing the currently over rewarded advertising and spam to get to the trending page. The point of the downvote is not to censor, but to voice your disagreement in the value of the post to the community at large.
Consider what made people get tired of facebook. People who pay to reach their facebook followers get priority on your facebook feed. Steemit is rather similar, except that we have 2 tools spread across the stakeholders to bring the better content to the top. We have the upvote AND THE DOWNVOTE. And using the downvote to disagree with those who upvote something just to benefit themselves and nobody else, is what your downvote is for.
That might be the intended purpose.. but there are unintended consequences.
I think we need support for something like steem-communities (reddit-style subscribed content) to get people content they find appealing.
Could we have communities like /r/sandersforpresident or /r/thedonald if they are allowed to down-vote each other?
Sure. But their reward pool contribution will be negated, so why would they come here in the first place?
A valid point. And I think reddit-style communities are on the way but as far as I know they won't be preventing people from downvoting.
i agree with u...