That is both good and bad
Not this kind of scanning. The plan stated is a very strict scanning type that returns a hashcode specific to that one photo - at least that's the theory, because if used strictly even a couple pixel changes could break it. So they want "smart" algorithms to go around that...Considering computers keep flagging sand dunes as nudity, pretty sure this is going to result in false positives, and the police will use overkill. Also, what's to keep them from using such a system to go through your phone and look for "extremist" content?
Reddit is shadowbanning comments containing links to alternative sites. I discovered this when user on my subreddit asked several questions, including any resources on reactionary ideology I had. My response included a number of YouTube links, as well as a link to a BitChute channel. It posted normally, but when I came back several hours later, the comment was gone. I reposted it, but it got – automatically – removed again. All my attempts to get the comment back up failed.
List of videos and channels was as follows:
I did some research, and as it turns out, this is nothing new or unusual. Reddit has been secretly removing posts and comments containing links to the alternative media sites such as BitChute for some time already. BitChute links had been banned all across Reddit. Mods are not able to override these blocks. The only way to post a bitchute source in Reddit is to do it verbally, that is, to name the title of the video and say it is on the BitChute. Any attempts at direct linking will get the post or the comment shadowbanned. And it is shadowbanning. The comment looks like it posted when you post it, and if moderators see it in their spam filter and try to approve it, it looks approved, but it's not if we go back and check.
- https://www.youtube.com/c/TumblarHouse/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh9mnprK8vtFuHkHyl_ffCw/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/c/Charlemagne_III/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsKBqLQmB1aCVuUC3e14riA/featured
- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRWRClsBI3p9gnYO8UBst2g
- https://www.youtube.com/c/MorgothsReview1/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/c/TheDistributist/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSkzHxIcfoEr69MWBdo0ppg/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqBN8cSd6hfwqq0BM2biXOg/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/user/DarkAgeTheorist/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbiEAICCX-lyat0IOUIbyCA/videos
- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh9mnprK8vtFuHkHyl_ffCw/videos
- Reactionary Expat Mirrors
It probably isn't, if it was Youtube doing it, yeah, it certainly would, but Reddit doesn't host videos and so isn't in competition with Bitchute. Further, if I had a guess, I'd suspect that Reddit's claimed reason for doing it has to do with people using Bitchute to post copyrighted material, which seems likely to me to be able to withstand legal scrutiny...that might just be a violation of non compitition laws in the united states you might want to talk with a lawyer about that.
Reddit does host videos, they just aren't primarily a video hosting site, and most videos are links to YouTube.It probably isn't, if it was Youtube doing it, yeah, it certainly would, but Reddit doesn't host videos and so isn't in competition with Bitchute. Further, if I had a guess, I'd suspect that Reddit's claimed reason for doing it has to do with people using Bitchute to post copyrighted material, which seems likely to me to be able to withstand legal scrutiny...
Hopefully that they have to cease production, lay off their workers en masse, and close shop.So what does this mean for the New York Times?
Basically that the New York Times will actually have to answer questions and provide evidence concerning their internal discussions regarding what they published in regards to Project Veritas. This may include communications regarding the article and researching it. This will allow Project Veritas to potentially find evidence that the NYT acted with "actual malice", a critical component of proving libel.So what does this mean for the New York Times?
During depositions, you can ask a person almost anything with very few limitations. This is the main goal of the Project Veritas Lawsuit, they get to dig into New York Time's secrets and expose them to the world. Any money they gain from the lawsuit is just icing on the cake.So what does this mean for the New York Times?
Best part, if the NYT hadn't slandered Project Veritas, they wouldn't be in such a position to begin with. Talk about a self-own.During depositions, you can ask a person almost anything with very few limitations. This is the main goal of the Project Veritas Lawsuit, they get to dig into New York Time's secrets and expose them to the world. Any money they gain from the lawsuit is just icing on the cake.