×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

YouTube Bans Terrorist Training Videos

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the can't-say-that-here dept.

The Internet 391

Virtual_Raider sends in an Australian news story that begins "Terrorist training videos will be banned from appearing on YouTube, under revised new guidelines being implemented by the popular video-sharing site. The Google-owned portal will ban footage that advertises terrorism or extremist causes and supporters of the change hope it will blunt al-Qaeda's strong media online campaign. The move comes after pressure... from Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman... [T]he new YouTube guidelines includes bans on videos that incite others to commit violent acts, videos on how to make bombs, and footage of sniper attacks."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

391 comments

If this means.... (5, Funny)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976227)

... no more Rick Roll videos, I am all for it.

Hey, Libertarians! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976265)

Guess what? Our government is itself a product of the market system. Cities like New York, London, and San Francisco are successful precisely *because* of their enormous governments--they compete for capital, talent, and prestige against cities with small, ineffectual governments that are unable to effectively lure and corral said capital, talent, and prestige. And as goes the city, so go city-states and nations: Somalia, being a libertarian paradise, is a rather unpleasant place to live for non-ideologues. Somalians, those who can, vote with their feet and leave.

Now go suckle Ayn Rand's rotten tits some more and leave the rest of us alone, you stupid fucking Paultards.

Re:Hey, Libertarians! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976423)

Yeah, people/cities/countries succeed only because the government makes it happen.

Go back to China you fucktard.

Re:Hey, Libertarians! (1, Flamebait)

j_166 (1178463) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976689)

Yeah, China is the destination for people whose opinions about political systems differ from yours. Go back to Russia, intolerance-tard.

Re:Hey, Libertarians! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976919)

Oh, and I forgot to mention - I am also a gigantic faggot who loves to lick the creamy cheese off of Ron Paul's drippling, flaccid penis.

You are a fucking bastard (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976345)

Linux on the desktop will never happen you bastards/

Re:If this means.... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976477)

Don't forget PETA propaganda

Re:If this means.... (2, Insightful)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976641)

As if anyone really could make out anything useful from YouTube videos. At least useful enough to be dangerous.

But maybe they will have to ban most of the videos then that are showing how people does blow things up.

I wonder (4, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976235)

how they'll implement the checking. Do you think they'll check each video that's uploaded or do you think it'll be based on a trust system?

e.g.

[ ] This is a terrorist training video.

You'd check the box if you weren't sure. It'll make YouTube's life easier...

Re:I wonder (1)

stevo3232 (794498) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976255)

Just like how they deal with copyright violations right now, people will have the ability to flag uploaded videos.

Re:I wonder (3, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976439)

It could be fun, like playing online minesweeper.

Do a search for terrorist videos and try to identify all of them.
Careful not to tread on a rickroll though.

Re:I wonder (1)

Wildclaw (15718) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976559)

Ah, the youtube copyright violation flagging system where only the copyright owner can flag it even though it obvious that it is a copyright violation.

It is funny (or not) how you can get videos removed for containing content against their tos, but if the content is actually illegally distributed, the copyright owner is the only one who can do anything about it.

Re:I wonder (1)

HadouKen24 (989446) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976649)

That's for legal reasons. The DMCA is a tricky piece of legislation. Online service providers found in violation of it can lose "safe harbor" protection, which would more or less kill YouTube. Better safe than sorry.

Re:I wonder (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976833)

It is funny (or not) how you can get videos removed for containing content against their tos, but if the content is actually illegally distributed, the copyright owner is the only one who can do anything about it.

There's nothing odd about this at all. Some (major) copyright holders are quite happy to see their materials on youtube as promotion, so they (effectively) authorize them by allowing them to remain. It's nobody's damn business except the copyright holder as to whether they send a takedown notice.

Re:I wonder (1)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976277)

They will rely on the self appointed mindguards to click the report button. The volume of reports will be great, so the removal will probably be fully automated. No different to any other content that is against their tos really.

Don't Worry, Israeli Terrorism Is Still Fine (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976339)

Videos that promote Israeli Terrorism are safe from this policy.

Hopefully this won't just stop with Lieberman and all US policy and media will be moved under control of Israel in the future.

Nope. Routing (5, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976381)

No, they'll just be using their routers. Packets for terrorist training videos, per RFC 3514 [faqs.org], will have their evil bit set.

Re:Nope. Routing (4, Funny)

Xiph (723935) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976687)

The Evil bit is meant for packets and routers, not for entire files/streams, read the document you linked!
However, I understand your general idea, and expansion of the Evil Bit could be the Evil Byte for IPv6, and be made mandatory in any file system.

8-bits
1 - Evil ( Must be set to 1 if )
2 - Partially Evil ( must be set to 1 if part of a greater evil, even if not evil in itself)
4 - Dangerous ( must be set to 1 if contents has potential to kill, destroy or otherwise cause harm)
8 - Terrorist ( must be set to 1 if Terrorist, wrongful 0 will give sender "Unlawful Combatant"-status)
16- Offensive ( must be set to 1 if an average American Housewife of Evangelical denomination will take offense by the contents)
32- Copyright Infringement( must be set to 1 if the content infringes on intellectual property rights )
64- [reserved for future use]
128 - Humour Bit (must not be set to 1, security is no joke!)

oops (4, Funny)

Xiph (723935) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976777)

Obviously, i failed at setting the humour bit correctly, it should of course be zero at all times.

Re:I wonder (1, Insightful)

Xiph1980 (944189) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976447)

More importantly, what do they consider terrorist videos?
Because, well, they should then also block the crap out of those extremist christian kids brainwashing videos.., and what about ETA videos? or PKK videos?
There's more extremists groups than the Al Qaeda one....

Re:I wonder (1, Insightful)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976721)

Don't forget the Earth First, ELF, PETA, and ALF videos.
And the so-called anarchists videos.

Re:I wonder (1)

mikael (484) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976765)

Dropping Mentos sweets into a Diet Pepsi bottle, shaking vigorously, then throwing?

Re:I wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976473)

well, you have to answer similar questions when obtaining US visas..

Monkey bars (4, Funny)

riker1384 (735780) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976727)

They find the terrorist training videos by using a sophisticated algorithm that can recognize any image of monkey bars.

I guess this means no more... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976267)

I guess this means no more pro-life, but lets shoot the abortionist type videos

I am betting no (4, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976395)

With the current admin, those are called freedom fighters. With the next admin, that may change.

Lieberman, God sees your lies. (-1, Flamebait)

loraksus (171574) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976269)

I thought he was out of the presidential race, what does he need this latest bit of attention for?

Re:Lieberman, God sees your lies. (0)

liquidpele (663430) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976291)

You think it's just for attention? I think he really cares. Hell, I can't believe this wasn't already done... and I wouldn't be surprised if this helps fight terrorism more than anything that the TSA has done...

Re:Lieberman, God sees your lies. (1)

MouseR (3264) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976379)

I actually find it hard to believe they actually let these videos on there for so long. It was stupid to begin with.

Re:Lieberman, God sees your lies. (2, Insightful)

diskofish (1037768) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976417)

I would be. It's not like the training videos are a new thing. They've existed before youtube, and will continue to exist after. Better to have it out in the open than underground, imo.

Lieberman The US Traitor (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976563)

"I think he really cares"

liquidpele, you are a fucking piece of garbage.

The number of just pure fucked in the head shits like you out in the world is too fucking depressing.

The scumbag Lieberman is hijacking US media to further the nuclear armed Israel war against the Arab and Muslim world you fuck.

Re:Lieberman The US Traitor (5, Interesting)

alexhmit01 (104757) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976663)

Yes, because Israel, a loyal US Ally/Satellite that has advanced US Agenda in the mideast, and contained its military operations to self defense, should be abandoned because an artificial liberation movement has become the latest leftist craze. The people in the disputed territories are in a crappy situation, which Israel HAS been attempting to negotiate a solution for. However, the Arab world's insistence on arming them to the teeth and paying them to die, plus keeping 3 generations of people in "refugee camps" instead of settling them (roughly the same number of Jews were kicked out of Arab countries as Arabs that fled Israel during the 1948 War) like Israel settled the Jews the Arabs kicked out, has prevented a solution.

Arafat the Egyptian embraced lefty rhetoric and style, so like Castro, became seen as a darling of the left who love dictators if they embrace "revolution." The fact that their aid dollars went to his corrupt regime and killing civilian Jews mattered way less than their embrace of a "freedom fighter." The fact that he also used the resources to systematically terrorize Arab Christians probably also ingratiated himself to the secular left.

The amount of land in dispute is TRIVIAL, except to Israel that is in physical danger without it. Emotional attachment aside, financial compensation to the displaced Arabs, including purchasing them land in nearby Arab nations, would have been WAY CHEAPER than the current disaster of a policy.

So keep spewing hateful ignorance, and be prepared to lose to the silent majority in two months, because you guys are irrational and crazy.

Re:Lieberman The US Traitor (3, Informative)

Notquitecajun (1073646) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976901)

Mod the heck up. Something that the left RARELY realizes is the massive hypocrisy of much of the world outside of Israel and the US when it comes to the Palestinians. The other muslim governments - who could afford to pretty much set up every Palestinian man, woman, and child in relative comfort, rarely aid them worthwhile. Israel isn't the one randomly firing rockets into civilian areas, isn't the one bilking its own people out of millions (as Arafat, one of the biggest con-artists of the muslim world did), and trying to look pathetic and rile its people up.

Re:Lieberman, God sees your lies. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976623)

You think it's just for attention? I think he really is a right-wing nutbar.

There, fixed that for you.

Further background, for those who don't RTFA (0, Redundant)

bconway (63464) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976285)

The internet has become a powerful tool for terrorism recruitment. What was once conducted at secret training camps in Afghanistan is now available to anyone, anywhere because of the web.

Chatrooms are potent recruitment tools, but counterterrorism officials have found terrorist-sponsored videos are also key parts of al-Qaeda's propaganda machine.

There have been online terror-training videos ranging from how to slit a victim's throat and how to make suicide vests to how to make explosives from homemade ingredients and how to stalk people and ambush them, said Bruce Hoffman, a counterterrorism expert and professor at Georgetown University.

suddenoutbreakofcommonsense

Re:Further background, for those who don't RTFA (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976445)

how to slit a victim's throat

Millions of Muslims slit throats of sheep at least once a year as a sacrifice for 'Eid-ul-Adha (the right sacrifice is to do it yourself).

From my personal experience the tough part is to overcome the fur resistance by exposing the skin (I have never been able to manage that and had to delegate this to someone else), but this problem (I guess) does not exist if you need to cut the throat of the captured enemy soldier (unless he has a really thick beard) (on contrary to what it looks like, this is one of the most merciful ways of execution or slaughtering because when you cut that artery the brain is quickly deprived of oxygen).

So you really do not need that kind of Youtube videos to be able to kill your captured enemy. It could be "graphic content" part of the regulations, not "terror-training" that prompted removal of such videos.

Re:Further background, for those who don't RTFA (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976627)

WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA?

Boo Hoo (5, Insightful)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976725)

Freedom of Speech means freedom for everyone. Yes this includes and is not restricted to; Terrorists, murderers, rapists, pedophiles, stalkers, bomb makers, nazis and holocaust deniers.

I do not have to apologise for saying these people have a right to speak. You need to apologise for suggesting that they should not have that right.

If you want rights for some and not for others, go live in Saudi Arabia or China or Russia. But of you right rights for all the people, then you need to stand up for those rights no matter who they are taken from.

Re:Boo Hoo (1, Insightful)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976813)

You are suggesting that someone apologize for exercising his free speech rights in a post that claims everyone should have unlimited free speech rights.

Can you say irony?

Next up, censoring "backup tools" (4, Interesting)

emj (15659) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976295)

See how long it takes for them to censor videos on howto run homebrew tools on Wii/Xbox/PS/DS/Pandora...

Counter productive.... (5, Insightful)

Siener (139990) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976301)

This just adds a bit of legitimacy to their cause. Now they can rightfully claim that they are being persecuted and censored. This is the same as what happens in parts of Europe where all things related to Nazis and Hilter are banned.

It just drives it underground and gives it more street cred. If these things are out in the open it is a lot easier to keep tabs on and to criticize it which in turn makes it more likely that people will see it for the bullshit it really is.

What ever the problem, censorship is almost never the answer.

Re:Counter productive.... (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976579)

I think much more "street cred" is given to them whenever an Afghan village is bombed by "coalition of the willing", or kids starved to death by sanctions, or elected government is overthrown, or country is occupied, or...

Re:Counter productive.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976607)

you mean terrorism training is mainstream?

Re:Counter productive.... (4, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976639)

I agree with you and my question for those who might disagree with you is this:

How is this different from what Google did in China at the behest of the Chinese government?

"Oh w-w-w-ait! Th-th-th-that's different!"

Sorry. No, it's not.

Censorship is censorship. Just because you don't agree with something someone says doesn't make it not censorship to silence them and it doesn't make it right.

Re:Counter productive.... (2, Insightful)

Spazztastic (814296) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976647)

Mod parent up.

He sums up everything about why we should ALLOW these kinds of videos. Some savage beheading a telecommunications worker in Iraq? Allow it. Clips from Jesus Camp? Allow it.

The other side of the argument could be that it just fuels people's anger towards certain groups. Just because a Muslim man blows up a disco in Israel doesn't mean your Muslim neighbor is going to do it to you. There's many variables that have to come into play when you consider censorship.

Then again, I'm all for allowing anything and everything. I only wish they allowed Dog to continue his bounty hunter show, but allowed him to spit the racial epithets he did because it was a reality show after all. Show the real side of reality.

Re:Counter productive.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976815)

**** you!!

Christian terrorists? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976307)

Yeah, right... I wonder if they are going to ban christian terrorist videos - bombing family planning clinics, killing doctors, gruesome abortion footage, etc.

Re:Christian terrorists? (0, Troll)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976403)

Yeah, right... I wonder if they are going to ban christian terrorist videos - bombing family planning clinics, killing doctors, gruesome abortion footage, etc.

Oh, no, of course not! Those acts are committed in the name of GOD! They wouldn't want to go against the Holy Living GOD!

*ack* *gag* *spit*

Ick. That tasted bad.

Re:Christian terrorists? (4, Informative)

Notquitecajun (1073646) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976511)

How many Christians advocate that garbage (lumping abortion photos isn't in the same league with the other two, btw - it's simply putting a picture to how ugly abortion is). I haven't seen anything that shows how to blow up abortion clinics - of course, I haven't looked for it, either.

I hope you aren't trying to lump them in with many of us who are pro-life and condemn those actions - particularly when we're in the extreme vast majority of pro-lifers.

Anti Abortion "terrorism" defeated (4, Insightful)

alexhmit01 (104757) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976571)

Give me a break, when was the last time you heard of a clinic getting bombed? It was a handful of nut jobs, and they are in prison. Clinton tightened the regulations on distance from the clinic, and protests kind of faded. They have adopted less confrontational approaches.

It probably feels good to go on Slashdot and compare Christians to Al Qaeda, you could go diary on Daily Kos and get told how wonderful you are, but it would be the same BS as here.

There is zero comparison between people protesting an abortion clinic and some people going too far than an organized movement to kill civilians haphazardly to advance a political agenda.

On some level you have to realize that the "internal justification" of the anti-abortion murderers is their belief that they are preventing murder, while the Islamist Terrorists are pursuing an agenda of despotism and establishing a Caliphate military dictatorship. The former are targeting the specific people that they believe are currently in the process of taking a life (in the view of the actor), the latter are looking to kill or maim as many as possible.

Not justifying the abortion clinic attacks, just suggesting that the actions were at least targeted at preventing what they consider a wrong, while the terrorists we are fighting are NOT targeted at preventing a wrong (I'd suggest that their attacks on our troops aren't terrorism, just asymmetrical warfare, our troops are a valid military target, for that reason I'm hard pressed to classify the hit on the Pentagon as a terrorist attack since it's a military target)... they may have a goal that they believe in, but their methodology is simply evil.

Re:Anti Abortion "terrorism" defeated (5, Insightful)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976821)

Not justifying the abortion clinic attacks, just suggesting that the actions were at least targeted at preventing what they consider a wrong, while the terrorists we are fighting are NOT targeted at preventing a wrong (I'd suggest that their attacks on our troops aren't terrorism, just asymmetrical warfare, our troops are a valid military target, for that reason I'm hard pressed to classify the hit on the Pentagon as a terrorist attack since it's a military target)... they may have a goal that they believe in, but their methodology is simply evil.

Actually, yes, the terrorists are preventing a wrong, at least in their own minds.

In their minds, we, the United States, along with our allies, are occupying their Holy Lands of Jerusalem and the surrounding area. From what they believe, Israel is a puppet of the U.S. government. To some extent, that might actually be true -- we have, in fact, supplied and trained their military, and we did lobby for the creation and international recognition of Israel as an indepdendent state following World War II.

As far as these Islamic terrorists are concerned, we are enemies of their God, no different than how the abortion doctors are viewed as enemies of YOUR God.

It is all the same, if you'd sit back and look at it objectively.

Re:Anti Abortion "terrorism" defeated (4, Insightful)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976913)

Jewish extremists, Christian extremists, Muslims extremists. I really see no differentiation between these folks and terrorism. They are all terrorists, including wacko christian abortionist extremists who bomb (but somehow think because it is their cause it is ok).

Who makes the determination of "extremist"? (5, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976317)

The Google-owned portal will ban footage that advertises terrorism or extremist causes and supporters of the change hope it will blunt al-Qaeda's strong media online campaign.

So who makes the determination what constitutes "extremist"? Would this guy [youtube.com] be an extremist because he stands up for what he believes in while fighting what he believes are the US' illegal search and seizures on US soil?

I'm sure the government thinks he's an extremist -- will Google?

Re:Who makes the determination of "extremist"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976577)

Yeah, and meanwhile the Aryan Nation and the KKK are launching an online blitz to support Palin with some videos even showing ways how people can shoot Obama with a sniper rifle on a rally, and how people should give their own lives if necessary to make Sarah Palin the next president of the USA, and even how Sarah Palin is the "White Hope" and how she is going to destroy ZOG in Washington, and we have to watch this crap, as if someone says anything against godsent Palin he is naturally evil and a terrorist.
Good to see how the USA controlling party uses this definition of terrorist only for those who are against them...

Re:Who makes the determination of "extremist"? (0, Flamebait)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976633)

I'm sure the government thinks he's an extremist

And I am sure you are idiot who is just talking out of his ass. Does he advocate violence or the violent overthrow of the government? Does advocate blowing up checkpoints and/or shooting the officers at the location? I didn't think so, so he is not an extremist.

He is, however, an dumbass who doesn't know the law or that the checkpoints have been deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court. So, the government might rightly consider him a whacko, I seriously doubt they would consider him an extremist unless he were advocating violence.

Re:Who makes the determination of "extremist"? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976681)

more than half of the US population advocate bombing people.

They are extremist

And maybe YOU are. (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976887)

Your own nation was formed via the violent overthrow of a government, and it guarantees you the right to do the same if your government becomes oppressive.

Do you feel that is "extremist"?

At what point does a "whacko" become a "freedom fighter"? There is such a point, you know. Not everything is legitimate just because your government rules it so.

Re:Who makes the determination of "extremist"? (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976831)

> So who makes the determination what constitutes "extremist"?

One things for sure - Bush spouting nonsense about `mission accomplished` etc won't be banned, nor will speeches during the war about `shock and awe` (ie dropping bombs on civilians).

Unless, perhaps, people try and get them blocked.

How about no more Army videos, then? (1, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976319)

If it's wrong to post videos that are propaganda for an organization that commits criminal acts of war, then shouldn't they ban videos of Army successes in Iraq?

After all, the U.S. invaded Iraq without just cause, making it an illegal war.

Re:How about no more Army videos, then? (0)

Jubedgy (319420) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976771)

Per UN Security Council Resolution 1441 [state.gov], Iraq was in material breach of the terms agreed in the ceasefire from the previous war and subsequent resolutions. They were given 30 days to comply with the resolution under the threat of "serious consequences". This resolution was unanimously passed by the UN Security Council prior to the commencement of hostilities after the 30 days had passed.

Not quite an illegal war.

And... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976329)

But how does youtube define "Terrorists"

Enemies of the USA? (Banning Islamic military videos)
Enemies of Islam?(Banning USA military videos)

Re:And... (1)

thedonger (1317951) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976397)

Exactly the point. You start banning a certain type of video, somewhat broadly defined, and it turns into banning any video that someone finds offensive.

Since nearly everyone is offended by something, eventually we have either no videos or just old Donnie and Marie Osmond clips. That's a world I don't want to live in.

Re:And... (2, Funny)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976829)

Donnie and Marie Osmond clips.

      I find Marie Osmond to be very offensive you insensitive clod!

      Too

      Many

      Teeth...

Piss off YouTube... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976331)

and piss off Senator Joseph Lieberman. I won't condone Terrorism (or at least the US government's own vague definition of terrorism - I bet many Iraqis find the myriad army videos on YouTube akin to terrorist training videos) However, free speech is something else entirely. It's important. I personally find the hard right Christian nuts on YouTube quite nauseating too, I don't want to have them banned because their views hinder my atheist agenda. Likewise, if some nutcase in the Middle East wants to spout his nonsense, let him. Most of us aren't listening. So, it's either all allowed or none is allowed, as far a free speech goes. This is one step down the slippery road.

This is called government sponsored censorship (2, Insightful)

Sun.Jedi (1280674) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976333)

When do they start burning books?

Re:This is called government sponsored censorship (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976485)

You can't burn books. That would raise your carbon footprint by huge amounts. Think of the children!

Re:This is called government sponsored censorship (1)

unfasten (1335957) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976797)

Really? Did Google take over the government last night and I just failed to hear about it?

Finally, we're winning the battle against terr'r! (4, Funny)

loraksus (171574) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976361)

Truly, comrade, this is a day of glorious victory!
We have cleansed al-Qaeda's videos from Youtube and have set their agents fleeing! While some may hide their terroristic videos on liveleak or any of these websites [wikipedia.org], the days of the insurgency and radical Muslim warriors are at an end!

God Bless the USA!

pretty stupid (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976371)

far better to keep it up front so that everybody knows what is going on. THis will simply move to another site.

Maybe a dumb question, but... (2, Insightful)

Critical Facilities (850111) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976373)

Is this really necessary? I mean, prior to this recommendation, was Google/YouTube receptive to "terrorist" or "extremist" videos being posted on their site? I'm all for trying to keep that kind of trash off the internet where one can (and with proper controls so the process doesn't get abused and applied to things other than "terrorist" threats) but this just sounds kind of like a silly policy that states the obvious. Just sounds like some politicking to me. Not to mention the fact that there are so many other places that this stuff lurks, I'm not sure how significant this would be.

Re:Maybe a dumb question, but... (2, Interesting)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976779)

> Is this really necessary?

Yes. YouTube was lousy with the stuff. You could find the stuff without much effort.

>...this just sounds kind of like a silly policy that states the obvious.

It should have been obvious, but it wasn't. This actually is a major policy change for Google. And it isn't like they had a leg to stand on, because they DO censor YouTube already. Ask anybody who has ever posted a politically incorrect video, especially one critical of the Islamic terrorists, about how open Google is. It was only a matter of somebody with enough standing to call them out on it, once Lieberman shined a light on em the rats had to run.

Re:Maybe a dumb question, but... (1)

Critical Facilities (850111) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976893)

That's interesting. I guess I've never searched for "how to make a suicide vest" on YouTube, so I have no basis for how much/little of this stuff was on their site. It's sad that there should have to be such a policy change to keep this type of stuff relegated to the "darker corners", but if what you say is true, I guess it wasn't an obvious requirement to Google or YouTube.

How long until Scientology abuses this? (4, Insightful)

seanellis (302682) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976407)

I give it a day or two before Scientology starts augmenting its fraudulent DMCA takedown notices, adding the charge that its critics are "extremists" and thus worthy of censorship.

Good on Senator Joe (2, Insightful)

INT_QRK (1043164) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976461)

Sometimes common sense, uncommon thought it may be, just has to prevail...

Re:Good on Senator Joe (3, Insightful)

gadabyte (1228808) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976865)

Sometimes common sense, uncommon thought it may be, just has to prevail...

and we're still waiting...

anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976481)

looks like this may help Scientology to pull down more Anonymous videos.

but yea its still censorship. and censorship is bad. mmmkay

Speech. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976529)

Sorry, but any speech or press that doesn't DIRECTLY deprive another person of life, liberty, or property should be protected in any and every form.

time for someone... (1)

BronsCon (927697) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976543)

to start up terrorismtube.com and howtomakebombstube.com

interestingly enough, snipertube.com already exists

Re:time for someone... (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976867)

Why?

All of the information you ever wanted to know about making bombs -- from low-order to high-order explosives and even nuclear devices can found at any collegiate library.

Wait a minute (2, Interesting)

hesaigo999ca (786966) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976595)

They banned a video that was disclaiming the scientology religion to be a fraud,
now they are banning videos that help people train for their religion....sort of.
I hope they ban all religious based videos including scientology videos trying to
reach out to new members.

Fair is fair , no?

Use the force... (4, Funny)

Pedrito (94783) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976601)

They're not going to ban Jedi training videos as well, are they? After all, they're part of the rebellion.

others too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976613)

they should ban terrorist promotional videos too,
like LTTE promotional videos and such,who ever harbored or helped terrorists in the name of liberation fighters or in the name of democracy already got results for doing so and some of them still getting and yet to get.terrorism is terrorism no icing can make it good.

ORLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976615)

[T]he new YouTube guidelines includes bans on videos that incite others to commit violent acts, videos on how to make bombs, and footage of sniper attacks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxlqsCPN-78 [youtube.com]

omg violence sniper attaxplz remoov kthx

unlikly that this would ever matter, dumb.politics (1)

coolsnowmen (695297) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976617)

A terrorist training camp spontaneously starting up because of some youtube videos would be just as likely as me starting my personal army based on 'Call Of Duty" (the video game). I mean, the game is good, but it alone is not going to convince me that war is the new cool thing to do.

That being said Google is free to do whatever it wants; this is just politics (as an above poster already pointed out).

Military Videos? (1, Interesting)

RabidMonkey (30447) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976653)

Does this mean that the multitude of videos posted by/for/about the US military, considered by some parts of the world to be terrorists, will be taken down?

Why is it ok to show propaganda for the US military but not another military force? One could argue that the US military has killed far more people than "the terrorists" have.

Thats no to say that I support "the terrorists", but lets be realistic.

again, who was hitler's favorite enemy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24976659)

terrorists, of course.

it would seem that smut & child porn would be causing more (long term), unrepairable damage than a handful of lunatics, who must be dealt with in person as needed?

television trains US/our children to be violent/hate.

No More Mythbusters? (4, Insightful)

Migraineman (632203) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976667)

So they're going to ban Mythbusters clips now? I mean, last week they showed how to make an improvised explosive using coffee creamer as the fuel. This week, they determined the necessary explosive amount required to blow up your average genetically-altered great white shark (albeit under the watchful eye of a California bomb squad.)

Seriously, a bomb is fuel, oxidizer, and a containment vessel. Technically, the propane tank on your barbecue grill counts as a "bomb" in the right context.

seems pretty simple.... (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976767)

sex videos are less offensive then terrorist training videos and since sex videos are against the rules.....

So this really is not a news worth article.

what is a "terrorist"? (2, Insightful)

viridari (1138635) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976807)

This is deeply troubling. If a citizen of a sovereign nation takes up arms with his neighbors to drive out an occupying force, is he a terrorist? There are Americans who participate in this sort of training regularly under perfectly legal conditions, and I wonder if they will be banned from Youtube under this new policy, as well.

How does this affect Linux? (2, Funny)

j_166 (1178463) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976819)

So does this mean Linux how-to videos are now illegal? I KID! I KID! They always were illegal under obscenity laws anyway.

I vote that Lieberman is a terrorist (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976937)

Get anything that he has on youtube removed! We don't want anyone else hurt.

Why is it... (2, Insightful)

Timberwolf0122 (872207) | more than 5 years ago | (#24976939)

...the magic words of Terrorism and Religion change the rules completely. I am not going to watch a training video and then go blow up a government building because I suddenly became radicalized, so why are they being taken down? Okay, so maybe we need to think of the children, so lets at least flag it as adult so net nanny will filter it out.

What really irks me is these (factual) videos are being censored yet on youtube there are thousands of (non factual, religious extremist)videos claiming the Earth (nay, universe) is 6,000 years old that are not being taken down.
So in conclusion we either take down all offensive videos (leaving just dramatic gopher and rambling blogs) and slowly creep towards thought police or we have to allow freedom of speech, I think that might be in a couple of European countries constitutions, oh and some union in North America ;-)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...