p49k

That’s not what will happen, because the US is by far the most lucrative market for advertising, and serving ads to users in the US means that they will have to adhere to US laws, even if they’re not physically located there, just as Twitter is forced to censor content according to the laws of every other country where it does business (e.g. censoring Nazi material in Germany)

As I said, they already falsely banned it again, this time for nudity even though there is no nudity. Is that enough to just admit that the system is completely broken?

As he explained, he would have been more than happy to bleep those 3 seconds in the first place if that was the policy. But as he pointed out, the policy only gives more severe examples than what was contained in his video. The point is that there should have been a realistic way for him to know it would break policy.

In this case, the damage is done. He slaved away for months on this video only to have lost thousands of dollars in ad revenue that can’t be recovered.

1. As he explains, YouTube's rules don't actually instruct creators to censor these types of outbursts, and he can site numerous examples of content by more well-known creators that are much more explicit than the 3-second clip.

2. After reversing their decision, Youtube has re-restricted the video because they now claim it contains nudity/sexual content. How does that tie into your argument, exactly?

Retaliation with the intent to silence critics is acting to undermine free speech. He could, for example, welcome the criticism and respond with facts.

Because this viewpoint isn’t consistent with his actions; he has a long history of retaliating against anyone who criticizes him, including attacking journalists and threatening them with lawsuits as well as firing employees who raise issues within his companies.

I thought IPinfo was just sourced from Maxmind, am I wrong? Is there any way to know who are the original sources of info in this space and who are reselling?

When it happens to you and this is the only way you can get access to some urgently-needed account, you'll be thankful HN didn't create a special category to push these down and make them less visible.

The original/first proof of work proposal, Hashcash, was in fact designed to solve email spam. It obviously served as the inspiration for Bitcoin’s proof of work component.

There’s a difference between credit scoring and credit reporting.

Credit scoring refers to the act of reducing the entirety of one’s credit history to a single number using an algorithm.

Few people are opposed to credit histories being available to potential lenders. However many find the scoring system to be unnecessary and flawed. Lenders could just look at the actual credit history to make a decision.

Maybe they corrected it, but for me it says the opposite.

> Notably, VLC Media Player is not backed by a Chinese company. It is developed by VideoLAN, a Paris-based firm.

From the guidelines:

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith

The person's core argument was obviously that "airlines do what they can to keep people safe rather than financially benefiting from criminal activity" which distinguishes Tornado from airlines and web browser developers.

As an aside, it was less important to prevent hijacking before 2001 because the end result of most hijackings before then was that nobody got hurt if pilots complied, so there would be no reason to place a cockpit door. That strategy obviously changed after 9/11.

Zipcar transitioned everyone who was on a free plan to a paid plan without their consent and started charging their card on file. Unethical and almost certainly illegal. I’m not surprised.