
BitChute Suspended By Patreon - randomname2
https://bitchute.info/bitchute-suspended-by-patreon-but-theres-more/
======
CM30
This is a great example of how 'just set up your own platform' may not be the
best solution to issues of censorship and what not. Because if you do, then
the platforms you need for things like payment processing are also likely to
ban your service for much the same reasons as before, and neutral alternatives
to them are few and far between.

Still, I guess this does provide a good use case for cryptocurrencies and what
not.

~~~
spookthesunset
> censorship

Except in this case it isn't censorship. Nobody can be forced to do business
with BitChute if they don't want to. That is just as much of a right as
anything else.

BitChute is still more than able to host all the trash it wants. They will
just have to find another payment provider. And they do exist. I mean, porn
sites manage to figure out how to collect payment. It's expensive as hell
because people constantly chargeback porn and virtually every porn hoster is
sketchy as fuck too.

Even then they could just get a PO box and have people mail in checks or hell,
even cash. It might be old school, but that is how it was done back when all
the wackos and conspiracy newsletters were actual things you got in the mail.

~~~
wpietri
Exactly. Somebody's freedom of speech does not override a service provider
freedom of association. Freedom of speech is not a right to distribution and
payment.

~~~
daxorid
We already lack freedom of association. In the United States, a business is
not free to discriminate against certain classes of people, or on the basis of
certain things.

The only question is what is the precise coefficient of friction on that
slippery slope.

You can argue that wedding cakes should be baked for gay couples but that
websites should not be hosted for nazis for reasons A, B, and C. But claiming
that businesses have some sort of broad right to free association is not
merely specious, but completely and obviously wrong.

~~~
wpietri
No freedom is perfectly available. Freedom of speech, for example, doesn't
allow you to commit perjury or fraud, and it doesn't entitle you to harass
someone. Freedom of association doesn't let you stalk somebody, or let felons
on parole talk to one another. All rights must be balanced against other
rights.

Businesses do have a very broad right of freedom to serve who they please. The
one exception is when historically many businesses have used that power to
participate in oppression against specific downtrodden groups. So a business
can happily decline to serve US congressmen, freemasons, and people who have
thrown up on their floor previously. But they can't decline to serve black
people as a group.

The specific groups who have been legally recognized for this are called
protected classes, and it's pretty settled law in the US:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_group)

------
Joeboy
Would anybody like to fill us in on what BitChute is, in theory and / or in
practice?

~~~
notafraudster
BitChute is a YouTube replacement made for people who are "Very Worried About
YouTube's Censorship". It uses WebTorrent for distribution to solve the
upfront server costs of running a video service. Cute idea.

You might imagine that with how endemic some people allege YouTube's
censorship is, there would be a variety of interesting and censored content on
BitChute.

Which is why when you check the front page you get and click popular you
get... FOX News clips for posting on Voat (a far-right reddit clone),
conspiracy theories about the magnetic poles, conspiracy theories about the
Mueller investigation, conspiracy theories about the Mexican border, a far-
right news source complaining about Jeff Flake, neo-nazi videos, Brazilian
spam, anti-semitism, people complaining about YouTube censorship, etc.

~~~
jim-jim-jim
That's the weird thing about free speech. Any community explicitly built upon
it tends to exclusively attract those in _immediate_ need of it: conspiracy
theorists and racists for the most part.

There's still a (naive?) liberal side to me that thinks free expression, even
of profoundly stupid ideas, might be a net good for society, but I don't want
to be a part of a community that is innundated with nasty weirdos who were
kicked off of every other platform, so "free speech" is almost a red flag to
me at this point. That's kinda sad.

~~~
pbiggar
> There's still a (naive?) liberal side to me that thinks free expression,
> even of profoundly stupid ideas, might be a net good for society,

Perhaps because the videos that get censored are only shitty to people who
aren't you?

~~~
jim-jim-jim
You're right about that. It's easy to think in terms of broad morals when
you're not a target. It's also why I don't buy liberalism even though I'm
defending a liberal practice in this specific instance.

I want to say that it's rooted in practicality rather than idealism. I'm
uncomfortable with for-profit entities being arbitrators of acceptable
content, because various "divisive" or "extreme" viewpoints outside of racism
are threatening to their bottom lines as well. A distributed, censorship-proof
network would have the side effect of allowing racism to propogate, but it
could also protect viewpoints that lie outside of the stifling pro-market
center-right consensus that grips most mainstream media platforms. The problem
is that these alternatives only attract assholes for the time being.

It's a definite tradeoff where I can't stand behind any one position
definitively yet.

~~~
pbiggar
It seems reasonable to judge for-profit entities by what they allow on their
platform. Certainly this has downsides - the "free the nipple" would agree
with your position on this.

------
cookiecaper
The problem with any platform that bills itself as "uncensorable" is that it
will always attract the people that everyone else wants to keep as far away
from them as possible. The repulsion people feel for those "deplorables", for
lack of a better term, easily and automatically transfers to any platform that
appears to tolerate them.

For this type of platform to succeed it must focus on self-replication rather
than too-big-to-fail uncensorability, propagating through a hydra effect that
makes it easy to clone and re-spin when major hubs get brought down.

This is basically what happened with BitTorrent. The trackers and indexes come
and go, as whenever one obtains too much prominence the hammer comes down, but
the core platform remains and it's reasonably easy for any interested party to
pick up the pieces.

If someone _really_ cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such
technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial. As they
obtained mainstream acceptance, they'd be able to focus on developing the
resiliency and portability of the underlying technology. With some work into
ensuring this tech becomes known and depended upon primarily for its
association with positive things, associations with undesirables can be
written off as an unintended side effect, but the ultimate outcome would still
be free publication without requiring the control or approval of any breed of
censorious supervisor.

Not unlike the internet itself, really.

~~~
Yetanfou
> If someone really cared, they'd run the most blase service on top of such
> technology and actively kick off anyone slightly controversial.

You'd first have to define controversial, a difficult task when dealing with
the 'net:

* Communism - fine in Sweden, frowned upon in former Soviet satellite states

* Marihuana - forbidden in Sweden, allowed in Canada and parts of the US, tolerated in the Netherlands

* Women in revealing clothing - fine in western Europe, forbidden in islamic countries (for a recent example see [1])

* Antisemitism - forbidden in most of western Europe, daily fare on TV in many islamic countries

* ...

This list goes on, where do you draw the line? It would end up being a very
bland service when everyone who is even slightly controversial is kicked off.
So bland, actually, that the service would never obtain mainstream acceptance.

[1] [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/01/egyptian-
actress...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/01/egyptian-actress-
charged-obscene-act-wearing-revealing-dress/) \- not exactly revealing to
'western' standards, enough for 5 years in prison according to the Egyptian
prosecutor

~~~
odessacubbage
maybe a good compromise would be to base frontpage content on regional
broadcast standards as that seems to be a pretty reliable measure for what is
considered acceptable and then simply relegate the other content within it's
own 'after dark' category, available to registered users. this is essentially
how we handled things back in the era of video stores and it still seems
applicable imo; keep the content, just bring back the curtain.

~~~
Yetanfou
This just moves the problem, it does not get rid of it. You'd still have to
draw a line somewhere or you'd be just as lambasted - if not more so - by the
ravenous hordes of Twitter etc: "odessacubbage.video hides nazis / commies /
porn / jihadis / furries / whathavenots behind a smokescreen, get him!".
They'll be calling your advertisers, scream murder at your registrar, boycott
your hosting company, petition the government to do an inquiry and do all
those other things the hordes do to quiet a dissenting voice. Those Twitter
hordes did not exist in the days of video stores...

------
ComputerGuru
I don't understand why BitChute can't moderate how the site itself appears to
the casual viewer without sacrificing Free Speech.

Free Speech does not mean they have to promote the content that is uploaded,
only that they do not censor it. Allow conspiracy theorists and extremists
(right or left) to post what they want.. but you don't have to feature all
recent uploads on the front page. You actually don't have to feature popular
or recent uploads on the front page at all.

~~~
dragonwriter
> I don't understand why BitChute can't moderate how the site itself appears
> to the casual viewer without sacrificing Free Speech.

When you decide that a private platform deciding what is acceptable and worthy
of promotion on their own platform violates free speech (which is the basis
for the “free speech” challenge against YouTube that justifies BitChute), then
exercising editorial control of what is given prominent placement on your own
platform would be a violation.

So, yeah, they are being consistent with their own (boneheaded) concept of
free speech when they are hands off with their platform recommendations.

------
motohagiography
Payment processing is so heavily regulated and dependent on networks, it's
hard to make the case that they are a normal businesses. When you have KYC
obligations, you have to collect intelligence on your customers and supply it
to the government, and that's not something a hotdog stand or a bookstore
needs to do. Payment companies are different.

Patreon may well be within its rights and contracts to sabotage business
partners it disagrees with, but the artificial barrier to market entry of a
license for processing payments makes their righteous posturing a bit
vainglorious.

I get these people don't do principle, but it's worth considering the broader
impact of dispensing with it.

------
AlwaysBCoding
This is the interview with Patreon CEO Jack Conte alluded to in the blog post.
It's really extraordinary to watch.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofpbDgCj9rw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofpbDgCj9rw)

~~~
simonebrunozzi
It's about 70 minutes; I would really appreciate if you could provide a TL;DR
of why you think it's extraordinary, before digging in.

Thanks!

------
egypturnash
What is BitChute and why should I care that it's being suspended by Patreon?
If I go to the front page of this site I just see a default Wordpress sidebar;
there is one post that shows upon the front page, and it is password
protected.

~~~
buboard
you re looking for [http://bitchute.com](http://bitchute.com)

------
woolvalley
Even if patreon & friends are ok with it, they still need to avoid businesses
that visa & friends do not want on their payment networks or will only allow
them for a large cost. And by derivative what major regulators do not want on
payment & banking systems or without a lot of onerous paperwork and gotchas.

The classic example in this is porn, and now it's fringe right wing things.

~~~
shard972
> The classic example in this is porn, and now it's fringe right wing things.

Consider that porn was gone after and deplatformed because of it's legal grey
area in many jurisdictions. I guess that means right wing things are now up to
be declared illegal now?

~~~
scrollaway
What? No. Porn is the lifeblood of many industries.

The problem with porn is two-fold:

\- Some classes of advertisers don't like it (don't want their ads associated
with porn). Removing porn from your platform might be necessary depending on
your business model and target audience.

\- Websites that will commonly have minors will usually avoid the risk and
outright ban porn. Still, it's not like they wouldn't take it if they could.
Steam for example has recently started approving porn games.

~~~
woolvalley
Also a history of much higher rates of fraud and chargeback risk.

------
orf
As always, seems to be full of right-wing anti-semitism, fake news and
outlandish conservative conspiracy theories. Just check the 'popular' tab:
"Welcome to "Your" Zionist Occupied Government", "EXPOSED: Jewish Donors
Granted "Access To NYPD HQ", "How the Globalists Stole Our Home". All uploaded
within the last hour.

\- [https://www.bitchute.com/channel/white-
genocide/](https://www.bitchute.com/channel/white-genocide/)

\-
[https://www.bitchute.com/channel/zionistreport/](https://www.bitchute.com/channel/zionistreport/)

\-
[https://www.bitchute.com/channel/wayoftheworld/](https://www.bitchute.com/channel/wayoftheworld/)

~~~
userbinator
Any service that strongly supports free speech will naturally attract the
extremists which have been displaced from elsewhere. Right or left doesn't
matter, it's just the result of the current political climate.

~~~
spookthesunset
> It's just the result of the current political climate.

It has nothing to do with the "political climate". It has everything to do
with the fact most people don't want to listen nut-jobs all day. In fact, in a
free market it would appear people seem to prefer platforms that banish the
nut jobs.

~~~
dreta
it has everything to do with the current political climate, and the fact that
extremist views on one side are tolerated, while ones on the other are
actively being fought against

if you don't want to listen to "nut jobs", you don't have to, nobody's shoving
Alex Jones in your face, but banning people you find objectionable sets up a
dangerous precedent

~~~
spookthesunset
I'm sorry you feel that way but maybe the invisible hand of the free market
has decided that it just isn't profitable for large companies to provide
platforms for people like Alex Jones. You should be happy to live in a world
where a business is allowed to make decisions that act in their rational best
interest instead of being forced by government to do something that doesn't
make sense to their bottom line.

Maybe Mr. Jones can build his own content distribution channels? If he can't,
maybe his ideas just aren't that popular and his business should fail?

And for what it's worth, Alex Jones supporters spread like a cancer through
sites that allow it. The community surrounding him and those like him are
often more toxic then the founders.

------
empath75
Free speech means no one is forced to do business with nazis.

~~~
dmerfield
No it doesn’t. Free speech means allowing nazis to express themselves so you
and others can understand nazism.

If you’re genuinely interested in understanding the principle of free speech,
I recommend this as an introduction:

[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-
speech/](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/)

~~~
jarfil
Yes it does. Free speech means not stopping Nazis from expressing themselves,
it doesn't mean you have to help them express themselves.

If you want to express something I don't like, then I'm not gonna try to
silence you, but other than that you're on your own.

~~~
ComputerGuru
> _Yes it does. Free speech means not stopping Nazis from expressing
> themselves, it doesn 't mean you have to help them express themselves._

I'm sorry, but I don't see where @dmerfield says what you are arguing against.

Quoting @dmerfild for posterity:

> _No it doesn’t. Free speech means allowing nazis to express themselves so
> you and others can understand nazism._

\---

Interestingly, in most of Europe, "Free Speech" does _not_ include this right.
It is pretty uniquely American.

~~~
jarfil
Let's also quote @empath75 which @dmerfild is answering to:

> Free speech means no one is forced to do business with nazis.

------
ctyptopat08
[https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=ctyptopat08](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=ctyptopat08)

------
KaoruAoiShiho
This is the best thing that could've happened to them. Otherwise I would've
never heard of Bitchute, now they're going to be famous.

~~~
cannedslime
Yeah, because that totally happened last time bitchute got screwed over by a
payment vendor (paypal)

------
signet
Pretty sure they were banned for taking on a public political stance
supporting disinformation peddlers like Alex Jones. Payment processers don't
want to be associated with this kind of content for obvious reasons.

~~~
colordrops
What are the obvious reasons?

~~~
tw04
Why don't payment processors want to be associated with someone calling for
violence in the streets while peddling conspiracy theories they know to be
untrue?

Isn't that pretty self explanatory...?

~~~
shard972
And yet CNN or MSNBC isn't banned from any payment platforms for giving
platforms to people calling for violence in the streets.

Hell, antifa have a patreon account and they are classified a terrorist
organisation by the US government
[https://www.patreon.com/intlantifadefence](https://www.patreon.com/intlantifadefence)

Has alex jones been classified a domestic terrorist? Is infowars a domestic
terrorist organisation?

~~~
danso
> _Hell, antifa have a patreon account and they are classified a terrorist
> organisation by the US government_

Source?

------
bitxbitxbitcoin
Operation Choke Point still going strong, I see.

------
beginningguava
"just build your own platform"

The good news is that the continued censorship will fuel adoption of crypto
and speed up the demise of parasitic middlemen who take a cut off every
transaction

~~~
buboard
wishful thinking, unfortunately

~~~
beginningguava
Once upon a time people wondered why people would do online shopping or use
credit cards when cash got the job done. Crypto will eventually become the
most logical option for most companies, it won't happen over night but it will
eventually. Accept payment in any cryptocurrency and then convert them to a
stablecoin so you aren't affected by price changes due to speculation

~~~
buboard
as others have pointed out, the problem of accounting/taxation is important to
solve before cryptos can become the cash of the web. and it might not be
solvable

~~~
russdpale
Our current financial system has taken 1000 years to formulate into what we
know today. People are impatient.

