Tag Archives: censorship

Twitter, stop the censoring madness!

Twitter is slowly but consistently spiraling down into a dumpster fire it’s apparently meant to be. Their new addition is this garbage…


This Tweet was suppose to have 3 replies. Of which I can see NONE. And whole Twitter is riddled with this nonsense now. Yesterday, some guy was asking about one function of a Swiss Army knife and what it is meant for, he apparently got the answer from one of 12 replies of which I could only see his reply. In the end it looked like he was talking to himself… It’s fucking monumentally retarded. Twitter, get your shit together and STOP censoring shit on my behalf. I don’t want some dumb retarded automated system removing tweets/replies because it thinks I’m not suppose to see them for god knows what reason. Stop fucking up the platform, like it’s not bad enough as it is, you have to keep on adding this bullshit and when it breaks everything, they just call it a “glitch”. Fuck off.

Make a god damn per-user censoring system so anyone who wants this nonsense can have it, but leave the rest of us the fuck alone. There is literally nothing that can offend me on Twitter so much that it needs to be entirely removed from my timeline or replies. NOTHING! If I see something I don’t like, I’ll just fucking scroll past it. It’s not a fucking hard concept you know!

Youtube Heroes is the dumbest idea ever

Now, while I’m not a Youtuber, I do spend quite some time on this platform watching stuff. And when Google announced Youtube Heroes program I was like: “WTF, now you’re going to police what I like and want to watch!?”

And yes, it’ll be a freaking heaven for trolls and SJW’s. Just look at this garbage…

Btw, this Youtube Heroes program is so awesome and applauded (not really) by people that they had to disable comments entirely. When initiative to stop unwanted content has to do that you know it’s very idea is broken entirely…

Youtube Heroes is a bad idea

They’ll give moderator power to random people who vaguely qualify for the “job” and they’ll reward them for flagging stuff. To make things worse, when they’ll be good at their “job”, they’ll get upgraded tools like “video mass flagging”. Youtube is already plagued by mass flagging issues where a certain community gathers around and flags videos of someone they don’t like en mass. And since Google itself can’t police billions of users they just automated this. If you flag something in large enough number, systems automatically demonetize video or even remove it or ban the account. And now they are upgrading this to give individuals same power. Why does a fucking blogger like me have to explain to one of the largest tech companies on this planet why this is a fucking BAD idea?

Way too vague terms of service rules

And the Youtube rules are so vague they’ll erase 3/4 of the Youtube in one single week. They don’t want “negative” content. Ok then. What is a “negative” content then? What qualifies as “negative” when rules are so vague anything can be “negative”? An atheist arguing how religions are stupid? Theists will find this negative and they’ll flag this. Veterinarian channel showing live surgeries (because of some blood and organs being shown)? Channel where bunch of crazy Brits are eating nasty foods and then puke like water fountain? Videos of violent car crashes? Videos of people arguing the stupidities of Black Lives Matters or feminism? All this qualifies as “negative” to someone. You can already see what kind of clusterfuck this will become when this “Heroes” program goes live.

Real issue are the comments sections

Reality is, Youtube is really focusing on comment sections and not as much on actual videos themselves. Because if those are actually that offensive, they get taken down anyway by casual reporting. Moderating trillions of comments under billions of videos is another story and many content creators expressed the impossibility to moderate those efficiently. So, lets focus on comments sections a bit more…

Give more power to content creators

Instead of giving unlimited power to random people, how about giving content creators more power to approve people moderating just their channel? So you have qualified people who YOU approved to keep your channel in check and free of negative stuff per YOUR rules? If you’re a content creator that doesn’t want word “nigger” on your channel, there is an easy solution to that.

How about giving content creators and their moderators power to automatically shadow hide (only hide for everyone else, but not for poster of that unwanted comment) comments that contain certain words? A simple list tool where you add undesired words and any comment containing them would simply get shadow hidden. It’s a simple solution that can eliminate 99% of trolls with few clicks. Trolls still think they are doing shit, but others don’t actually see their garbage. This would almost single-handedly eliminate the need to disable entire comment sections for individual videos.

These could be global with global or per video exclusions (so video cannot contain this and that offensive, but if it contains some 3rd word, it can be allowed). So you can still allow certain comments on specific videos even though same words would be banned globally on your channel, adding extra flexibility for automated moderation of your channel.

Give more power to viewers

Something offends you? Then don’t fucking watch that. If you don’t like something, unsubscribe from that channel. No one forces you to watch it. Just because you don’t like it, that doesn’t mean others don’t like it as well. So, first tool is ability to unsubscribe. Use it as it’s already there.

Next one is “Word filtering for comments” for viewers. Just like content creators, users should have same tool for self censorship. This way you only police content YOU view, not the content EVERYONE else are viewing. So, if certain words offend you so much in comments section, you add them to your personal “Word block list” and comments containing those words won’t be visible for you anymore. But only for YOU. A simple solution for “great” problems. You as a viewer are in full control over what will hurt your feelings and what won’t. You can ban 90% of dictionary if you want. This will be your view on the Youtube then.

Gab.ai social network, a spinoff from Twitter is already using this. This way censorship stands entirely on shoulders of the viewer. You are the censorship authority for your angle of view only and no one else. This way you can live in a beautiful fairy tale while not affecting others who just want it all 100% authentic and uncensored, with trolls and whining SJW’s included. Isn’t this better because YOU are in full control what YOU want to watch and not someone else dictating it to you?

Why none of this should be enforced by Google/Youtube?

Erm, because it’s fucking creepy idea? I don’t want some faceless company dictate what content creators should have on their channels or what we, the viewers are allowed to watch or read under the videos in comment sections. But if content creator decides he/she/attack helicopter doesn’t want to see certain types of comments, they could easily and in few seconds solve with word blocking list. Don’t want “faggot” or “bitch” in your comments section? Add them to the list and voila, comments containing these two words are gone. Because some content creators might want that, while others maybe don’t.

But with very simple tools mentioned above, each viewer could decide what they want or don’t want to see during their Youtube experience. Isn’t that far more reliable and abuse proof because YOU are the one creating the rules for content YOU want to see (or don’t want to see).

Appeal to Google

So, Google, fire everyone who came up with this retarded idea of Youtube Heroes and implement features I’ve mentioned above. It’s how you make Youtube experience better, not by allowing trolls and SJW’s getting even more tools to abuse and wreck your platform that’s already not in the most brilliant state…

It’s not censorship when private companies do it. Or is it?


There was a lot of talking about this after basically all incidents where high profile people got censored on social networks for what they posted there or sometimes even got banned for it. And every time it ended with: “yeah well, they are private company and they can do whatever they please since it’s their social network, but…”

This idea only supposedly holds true if the government is censoring people, which by the First Amendment in America, it’s not allowed to. I’m not aware of any law here in Europe that entitles us to same level of freedom of speech. I guess we have something similar, but it’s not as prominent as famous First Amendment in US, which is why I’m not aware of it off the top of my head.

Three reasons why I think this is bullshit and why private companies should be held to the same standards as governments when it comes to free speech:

1. Laws like First Amendment were written down in times when there was NO concept of internet or social media. At all. It was designed for forms of media existing back in those days, which was basically just public communication in person and newspapers, maybe? Today, media in general spans far wider and as we can see already, social networks are far more important and effective than any other form of communication, especially when it comes down to pushing ideologies or shaping global political landscapes.

2. Companies can do it on behalf of the government and allow governments to censor people unpunished. It’s not like they’ll gonna brag about it, so, if no one finds out, no harm done by the government, right? Nice example of that was Facebook censoring Germans when they expressed concerns over “Syrian refugees”. Anyone daring to talk about that or even criticize Angela Merkel for allowing this mass immigration from Middle East got punished on Facebook by a ban or demand to delete those kind of messages, because Germany’s government and Facebook made a censorious agreement in that regard. Of course they weren’t bragging about it, but it’s not like people wouldn’t find out…

3. Third and in my opinion most important reason, social networks these days are bigger than most governments. In fact they are bigger than biggest governments combined. And since they are so effective at shaping narratives or pushing certain messages to millions and billions of people, they should be held to the same standards as governments when it comes to free speech. Especially because these very same social networks dictate how governments are perceived or shaped by the voters based on how company itself is aligned on the political map. For example, in Twitter’s case, they are very much aligned with the pushing of feminist bullshit and hating the people who align with the political right. Facebook censoring people who have an opinion over Middle Eastern immigrants taking over their country. Yes, they are private companies, but they affect real life countries and governments more than anything else these days. If you ask me, that very much makes them involved with the governments and lives of people under certain government and thus they are doing censorship in the name or on behalf of governments. And such behavior should be prohibited by a worldwide global law(s).

Social networks should be neutral

Because of the above three reasons, social networks should be neutral and should not side with anyone, because they are already too involved with governments no matter how much everyone denies it. And yes, this is censorship and silencing of people. I don’t give a fuck if a social network is run by a private company. It’s clearly and very much visibly affecting real world governments and people under them and not necessarily in a positive way. Technologies and media change, but laws remained the same. Laws need to be updated for current modern times to ensure this neutrality and actual freedom of speech. Yes, also by enforcing this on private companies like Twitter and Facebook.

Only question is, which government will be the first one to enforce it? I have very little hope for Germany given recent events and it’s not looking particularly good for United States either, despite existing First Amendment… There might be some hope in France maybe. French know how to do revolutions. But in the end, governments are benefiting from all of this, why would they interfere with it? This is my main concern why things might never change or improve…

What’s your opinion on this? Let me know in the comments down below.


Wilders Security, you’re a bunch of wankers

I’ve been a long time member of Wilders Security. A community where all the nerds who love to fiddle with security software meet and exchange information. But yesterday, they done fucked it up. And originally, this was meant to be a very polite argument/post about it, because I just left their forum after the “incident”, but later when I came back to grab a screenshot, I’ve realized they also banned me. So here it is, the less polite version because fuck you Wilders. Great community fucked up with morons who moderate it. Not the first time I’ve seen it and not the last either. I guess every leadership of some community needs some time to show their true colors. And they just showed their turd like brown colors yesterday at Wilders Security.

Actually, I’m lying. They fucked it up long ago when they introduced the “No A vs B” policy. It was a lot more interesting to have conversations prior that dumb forum rule. But since I wasn’t affected by it later on directly, I was just mildly annoyed by it. With this, they enforced strict zero comparison threads between products to eliminate fighting between users (which I’ve hardly ever seen even before the rule came in action). All fine and great, but what they have done now is you can’t talk about anything actually productive because of it. You want to compare certain feature Kaspersky has to a features found or lacking in lets say avast! ? Nope, can’t have that because it’s “A vs B” bullshit. So, how the fuck am I suppose to explain or ask something if I’m not allowed to compare it with a feature competitor has and which in most direct and simple way explains it to others what I’m asking or talking about?

With such logic, you may just as well close the entire forum because all you can do on it is either being a developer posting updates about your program, a total absolute noob who needs an information about something or you’re someone who keeps on patting himself on his own back what a great of a fanboy he is because he constantly talks just about one brand. Because involving a brand B in the same conversation apparently gets you fucking locked and banned. O_o

Moderator locked this thread:

In case they try to erase this one as well, here is a screenshot…

Behold, the glory of A vs B. I was talking about the whole “free antivirus” part of the security industry and how it has nosedived into poor quality products ruined by the chasing for profit and it gets locked because “You can’t have dem A vs B”. Fuuuuuck youuuuuu.

A vs B for me is when you bash one brand with weak or no arguments to prove how second brand you’re a fanboy of is superior to it. But when you post a general observation about 90% of the industry, that ain’t fucking A vs B. That’s A vs B vs C vs D vs E vs F vs … It is physically impossible to open thread of such nature and not give arguments about each brand. Without arguments, saying they just suck would be a pointless bashing of brands. But hey, apparently my logic isn’t their logic…

But this wasn’t the tipping point. It was what came after. Contacted a moderator who of course refused to give a comment so I’ve posted a question to a general section what’s the deal. And guess what they did? Silently erased the thread like nothing ever happened. So, you can’t talk about it through PM with a person who locked it (it was angry, but a polite PM btw), you can’t talk about it in a general section. Well fuck you then. I get it, it’s your forum, you can do whatever you want on it, but that doesn’t change the fact you’re being an absolute dick. If anything pisses me of the most is this arrogant behavior when wearing a “Moderator” tag turns normal people in dickheads. And this was a prime example of it.

I’ve met some cool people at Wilders Security, but I don’t think I’ll be coming back even under a different name. There is no point really, because even if I change the name, same retards will still be moderating it and I frankly don’t see much point in being there if I’m being censored like that. If anything I absolutely hate censorship. And they are doing it like a true gestapo. If I became such a thorn in their heel after 12 years of “service” in their place in such bad way that they had to ban me, so be it.

Let this post be a reflection of how they roll so other people can see it. In a place where they can’t just wave with their magic moderator wand and make it go away like nothing ever happened.