YouTube removes 'gender identity' from hate speech policy
-
Keep using uorigin for blocking as. Also use Firefox.
-
Why specifically creatives? There are so many other professions that are more important to someones everyday life and no one seems to hold the same vitriol at them valuing their time that people do for creatives. I don't see people suggesting that nurses get a day job and do nursing on the side.
It has to do with the societal consequences of how them "valuing their time" impacts people. Nurses refusing to do volunteer nursing has little impact on the overall system of access to healthcare.
Healthcare is heavily regulated through legislation, and is going to be free or paid or corporate or not corporate largely as a result of the legislation. Nurses can't just do what they want. People who are concerned about the state of healthcare should therefore change things by targeting legislation, not by targeting nurses.
Creative work is not like this. Creatives refusing to do do volunteer creative work means that either they will charge for their work, which creates a barrier to access, or they will use (and push others to use) platforms like YouTube and TokTok that make money from ad data.
The former choice results in class differences in access to art, and the latter choice results in everyone using platforms that have proven themselves to be hostile to minoritized groups and progressive causes. These outcomes aren't legislated -- they are the result of creatives choosing to "value their time".
In otherwords, creatives choosing to "value their time" means that they will happily enforce class-based restrictions in access to art, and will happily support conservative corporations and surveillance capitalism.
And I practice what I preach, too. I have spent hundreds of hours developing free software and making free educational materials for people, donating my labour to support progressive causes and supporting others who do the same. Creatives who insist on charging for their work are a ball and chain on the movements I support. They are leeches and class traitors.
Creatives should value other people. Fuck their time.
-
I mean, in the past companies wouldn't be caught dead associating with LGBTQ+ people, let alone take their money. Now LGBTQ+ is acceptable enough for predatory advertising so...idk progress from like a fucked up capitalist perspective I guess?
-
I used newpipe for a long time, currently using a fork called pipepipe. I forgot why I switched lol
Probably for SponsorBlock.
-
The buffer only stores one video, for direct user experience purposes only, and is wiped upon playback of a subsequent video.
Well that’s just my assumption based on the company’s data privacy reputation (lul I grinned typing that)
Love how aggressive Alphabet’s Google’s YouTube is after watch history’s disabled.
WATCH HISTORY OFF!! CLICK TO ENABLE (NO RECOMMENDATIONS B/C YOU DESERVE A BLANK PAGE) OTHERWISE, AGAIN !PLEASE! !!CLICK!!
#darkpattern
-
You're right. They didn't.
The delulu is strong with this one.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I'm a little bit confused on this: if you visit the policy page now it does (at least for me, in Europe) still list "Sex, Gender, or Sexual Orientation" as a protected group in that exact same list. Obviously slightly different as they've combined a couple of different groups in there where previously they were delineated: plus I wonder if this is potentially showing because I'm in a different region. Would be interested to see what someone in NA sees: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801939
-
What does this achieve other than funneling money from companies' advertising budget to Google a little faster?
-
What does this achieve other than funneling money from companies' advertising budget to Google a little faster?
-
And I'm saying you're not paying for it, and that's the problem. Everyone got way too comfortable with getting "free" shit from corporations that would trample our rights the second it became convenient for them.
Just here to say it’s fucking WILD that you’re being downvoted
-
Boycotts are performative stunts that feel good but don't have impact on companies and even gets more attention ON those companies.
No really, this is a phenomenon that's known. When people were protesting Blizzard, I swear to fucking god, people I knew for years who hadn't played WoW since they were kids suddenly decided to reactivate their accounts because all the talk about blizzard "made them nostalgic" and despite being sympathetic to the people hurt by the company, they simply didn't have the mental value-system to draw lines between those two things. Their own desires to escape and recapture youth was far, far stronger than the social messaging they honestly just felt was finger-wagging and parental scolding, so they rejected the idea of protesting without conscious thought.
If we put that much energy into volunteering with groups raising funds for primaries, getting to know our neighbors and forming communities, we would abolish this fascist empire in a single election cycle. (Assuming we have elections again.)
Boycotts are not enough, but in combination with girlcotts they are very efficient.
I'll see myself out.
-
(For reference: I am cishet, but have family & friends in the LGBTQ+ community and consider myself an ally.) Usually just lurk, but I feel you so badly.
I've been saying it forever as well. They're spending millions, to specifically target/advertise/appeal to the community... out of the goodness of their hearts? Right.
Then as soon as its "over", the facade drops and its on to the next big event/target market. Rinse and repeat.
As a cishet I saw it what was as soon as they started it. It was about 10-15 years ago. It was sleazy then, and it's sleazy now. They are just trying to milk the population as much as they can. They don't give two fucks about inclusiveness or equality. They know a large portion of Americans want equality. So it's a cash cow.
-
Fuckin’ Melvin
MELVIN USED MORAL SUPERIORITY
BUT IT FAILED
IT HURT ITSELF IN ITS CONFUSION
-
Boycotts are not enough, but in combination with girlcotts they are very efficient.
I'll see myself out.
They say when a boycott meets a girlcott, a baby cot is born...
-
Boycotts are not enough, but in combination with girlcotts they are very efficient.
I'll see myself out.
Best reply I got here tbh.
-
So, sundar pinchai can be added to the list of CEOs that suck?
Because a lot of the time, it's weird that when the company does nasty shit, nobody names him as the head asshole in charge the way that other companies and ceos get handled.
The dude has been in the driver's seat for pretty much every major deterioration of Google/alphabet for years.
Prabhakar Raghavanalso also deserves a dishonorable mention.
-
Of course everyone is allowed to speak their mind. But being called names for not supporting a particular point of view sounds like hate speech to me, wouldn't you agree?
No, hate speech is targeting someone for how they were born. (Skin color, sexual orientatio, gender identity, ect.) Reacting to someone saying stupid shit is not hate speech and dilutes the meaning of the word to use it that way.
-
I used newpipe for a long time, currently using a fork called pipepipe. I forgot why I switched lol
Ooh, great to know. Thanks!
-
It's almost impressive how quickly the whole of the business world capitulated to Donald Trump.
They didn't capitulate. They were mostly faking it all along, friend. It made for good profit at the time and to get good Blackrock or Vanguard investment money.
This is why despite putting rainbows in X, or FB, or YT, or LinkedIn profiles in the USA or in some Western countries, no company ever did that in any profile outside the West.
It was all for show... and money.
If they actually believe it they would have done so across the board. Yet they didn't. They were just hoping most people wouldn't notice. Many did. There was a meme RE: this floating around from years ago, too. -
It’s almost like their support for these issues was never genuine to begin with.
Exactly.
