Jump to content

How much YouTube do you watch?


Zen Traveler

How much YouTube do you watch?  

20 members have voted

  1. 1. How much YouTube do you watch?

    • None
      2
    • Less than 6 hours a week.
      7
    • Between 6 and 12 hours a week.
      4
    • Over 12 hours weekly.
      7

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 10/01/23 at 05:01 AM

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Zen Traveler said:

I guess my position is I saw what basically pre/non-censorship brought us and I'm happier with the alternative...Once you think we've reached balance AI comes along. Oh, well. Watched about 3 hours of YouTube already today. 😎

 

I'm hopeful that the courts will put the brakes on most of the official and unofficial state censorship activities. The First Amendment was "first" for good reason. Nothing good follows censorship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed but the line blurs when delineating between official and "unofficial."  Only true (official) state censorship is guaranteed to be protected against by the constitution.  Nothing good follows censorship, yet corporations and businesses as private entities have been granted unlimited censorship regarding its employees and their conditions of employment.  Concurrently, the same private entities are also allowed to censor anything that is attached to their property (see Klipsch Forum and moderation policy).  But you have experience with that as  I recall.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

Concurrently, the same private entities are also allowed to censor anything that is attached to their property (see Klipsch Forum and moderation).

Ya know, I joined Facebook after they made major changes in 2017/18 and appreciate how they try and censor misinformation and purposely irresponsible civic behavior as I gather YouTube does. Fwiw, I happen to like Facebook as well, but this thread is about YouTube so I'll leave it there. 👣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

 appreciate how they try and censor misinformation and purposely irresponsible civic behavior 👣

How do  You know what is Factual Information??

I am involved in several lawsuits google censorship ....If you believer that  Gov and Goog are separate entitirs informaymtion wis e.. You are mistaken badly. 😀😀😀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

 

I'm hopeful that the courts will put the brakes on most of the official and unofficial state censorship activities. The First Amendment was "first" for good reason. Nothing good follows censorship.

 

3 hours ago, oldtimer said:

Agreed but the line blurs when delineating between official and "unofficial."  Only true (official) state censorship is guaranteed to be protected against by the constitution.  Nothing good follows censorship, yet corporations and businesses as private entities have been granted unlimited censorship regarding its employees and their conditions of employment.  Concurrently, the same private entities are also allowed to censor anything that is attached to their property (see Klipsch Forum and moderation policy).  But you have experience with that as  I recall.

 

3 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

Ya know, I joined Facebook after they made major changes in 2017/18 and appreciate how they try and censor misinformation and purposely irresponsible civic behavior as I gather YouTube does. Fwiw, I happen to like Facebook as well, but this thread is about YouTube so I'll leave it there. 👣

 

48 minutes ago, the real Duke Spinner said:

How do  You know what is Factual Information??

I am involved in several lawsuits google censorship ....If you believer that  Gov and Goog are separate entitirs informaymtion wis e.. You are mistaken badly. 😀😀😀

 

4 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

Disregarding the anti trust lawsuit brought against google by the gov, but thats not important right now.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, the real Duke Spinner said:

How do  You know what is Factual Information??

I am involved in several lawsuits google censorship ....If you believer that  Gov and Goog are separate entitirs informaymtion wis e.. You are mistaken badly. 😀😀😀

Good question, but knowing non factual information seems a lot easier.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the real Duke Spinner said:

 ....If you believer that  Gov and Goog are separate entitirs informaymtion wis e.. You are mistaken badly. 

Google and our Government are separate entities.  See below for one example: 

18 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

Disregarding the anti trust lawsuit brought against google by the gov, but thats not important right now.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Is a lawsuit proof of extrication of a relation, or is it a manifestation of intimidation leading to a revelation about the power of our nation?

I don't know but I'm glad to see liable charges being brought (and won) against media sources spreading provable lies, as well as, those who served in government being letigated as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2023 at 1:56 PM, tube fanatic said:

For me it is the best source of free religious and gospel music videos around.  
 

Maynard

I'm curious, if you predominantly watch that do you also get other things along the same line that interest you? 🤔 Btw, this question is for everyone who enjoys YouTube. 😊

 

Fwiw, with my Bible interests I get caught up with really good content directed at a specific interestand. So much so that I gotta step back realizing their algorithms have me pegged! On the flipside, how is it shaping my thought process (in both positive and negative ways)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, oldtimer said:

Agreed but the line blurs when delineating between official and "unofficial."  Only true (official) state censorship is guaranteed to be protected against by the constitution.  Nothing good follows censorship, yet corporations and businesses as private entities have been granted unlimited censorship regarding its employees and their conditions of employment.  Concurrently, the same private entities are also allowed to censor anything that is attached to their property (see Klipsch Forum and moderation policy).  But you have experience with that as  I recall.

 

I'm only worried about "official" state censorship. A good example would be this: An important medication is discovered to treat a dangerous medical condition, but when the doctor attempts to publish these findings, the state mechanisms - regulatory bodies, bureaucrats, intelligence agents - demand through backdoor channels that private companies block the publication or discussion of this information in order to achieve an agenda hidden from the public's scrutiny.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

I don't know but I'm glad to see liable charges being brought (and won) against media sources spreading provable lies, as well as, those who served in government being letigated as well.

 

There's no standard methodology for determining truths from untruths outside of age-old courtroom evidence procedures, which have limited usefulness in politics. So-called "fact-checking" institutions are nothing more than political action committees pursuing conformance to preferred Establishment political narratives of the day.

 

It should be obvious enough that in the "information age" ALL governments will seek complete control over communications strategies and systems. Otherwise, they would obviously lose control and power, and that violates the prime objective.  Governments have no interest in determining truths from untruths. Their only interest is propagating their version of truths in order to maintain a national narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RealMarkDeneen said:

 

I'm only worried about "official" state censorship. A good example would be this: An important medication is discovered to treat a dangerous medical condition, but when the doctor attempts to publish these findings, the state mechanisms - regulatory bodies, bureaucrats, intelligence agents - demand through backdoor channels that private companies block the publication or discussion of this information in order to achieve an agenda hidden from the public's scrutiny.

 

 

I totally and emphatically disagree with your statements. You are totally biased in one direction.

JJK

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...