It happened about a month ago when YouTube was flooded with porn. It was said to be a planned attack since many videos have been uploaded and titled with names of popular teenage shows and idols, they started with footage of the shows mentioned in titles, but then the porn part appeared. These videos were favorited a lot and people posted same stuff as video responses. I haven't seen this with my own eyes, the information above has been read at various sites, and the 1st source where I read this fact was BBC. I was at the office and couldn't google for more, but understood people wouldn't do anything like that just for fun. There are so many internet pranks carried out, but hardly any are covered by BBC.
As you might already know, I'm a severe porn hater. I hate it in all kinds and ways. I think that sluts should be murdered for making this world a dirty place. But this case made me curious, and I was right that there's a story with many sides behind naked asses...
As some sites write, the porn attack was a response to suspension of an account of a 8-years-old user Lukeywes1234 who liked posting videos about his favorite video games characters. And here's where I found 2 versions.
According to the 1st one the kid said he wants to gain 50 subscribers within a month. Users of the well-known 4Chan imageboard decided to help him and in a few days Lukeywes1234 had about 14 000 subscribers. YouTube blocked his account stating he's too young to use the service.
Version 2. YouTube blocked the account because the 8-years-old user posted vids with characters that are registered trademarks of companies that produce video games. And people from 4Chan performed the porn attack not just to support the guy, but as a form of protest against deleting music YouTube sometimes does. For example if you make some cute home video and use your fave song as a background, YouTube might delete the sound from what you've uploaded. This is what I've seen in some users' content, and personally received messages that what there's in my vid corresponds with property of some company. My problem was solved when in the video description I wrote what and by whom the soundtrack is.
If something like this happens, people usually try to find either the guilty one or the one who started it all. According to the BBC site, a German user Flonty is believed to have uploaded a great deal of those porn videos. He told the BBC journalists that it was a part of the 4Chan raid, and here's what quote I found at the same site: "This kind of raid showed how easy it is to upload porn to a website that millions of people browse on a daily basis."
The German guy whose profile said he's 21 added that if kids want to find porn, they will find it anywhere on the net. And I have to agree with him. What is more - modern kids are often more aware of all dirty stuff than all of us, old fa**s.
Defending an under-aged community mate, protesting against deleting copyrighted content and stating that kids can easily find porn. What links all these issues except the fact they're sides of the same story? To my mind the main idea is that community sites are growing and it's becoming more and more useless to fight them. Kids learn to use computers almost at the same time as they learn to walk, people upload music online as soon as it is released (even if not to some public site, they are likely to send the tracks to their friends and those can post them somewhere if they like it etc.), and kids really learn about where they come from not when mum and dad explain them, but often from other kids in the playground or older brother's magazines.
I don't think the internet is the primary source of the harmful influence. It must be an additional way or a consequence. If porn wasn't presented/perceived as something cool, beautiful, interesting or simply that makes eyes like @_@, kids probably wouldn't be curious about it that much. But in the case of attack porn might have been used exactly as something that attracts attention (remember the meme about a successful ad: sex, kids, animals). Those who attacked YouTube might have chosen it to draw attention to what they've been protesting against. Still I think it's better than, for example, using animal abuse vids. Aren't I right?
Kids on the net - the issue that causes the previous mentioned one. But cannot be stopped and it's hardly controllable. They will use internet. More and more. It's life. It must be the same way as it used to be with television many years ago. And who should be blocked and controlled are the porn site owners and especially advertisers. What I've seen many times were explicit porn site ads on sites with ready-made school reports.
Of course it's easy to delete an account of an under-aged person having accused them of violating rights or stating they're too young to use the service. *sigh* I've been naive and thought that games characters are developed for children and the developers would be happy if those were fascinated with them. The crash of childish trust over adult money-hunting.
Posting music on the net is also unstoppable. I think so as a user, blogger and a person who enjoys making home videos adding my favorite tracks. I've found a musician who supports me in this.
Kostyantyn Gordeychuk, the frontman of the Monolit band whose pic has already been posted in this blog (yes, he is a friend of mine and I always ask for his opinion on questionable situations related to music) thinks the same way. He said that as a musician he understands that leaking music to the online space can hardly be avoided, so their debut album "Live but not exist" has been posted to their official site, and new songs appear both there and at Monolit's communities in social networks. (check them out on Facebook - Monolit)When I asked what he thinks of cases when people use their music in their personal vids, Kostyantyn said he appreciates it because that's nothing more than publicity and shows that the song is successful. It's good for bands that are not worldwide stars yet and have need and space to develop. He added that things might change when they reach the level of the classic rock "monsters".
I also understand the YouTube people who have to delete content that violates someone's rights. People have worked on music, movies or characters to get money and it would be unfair if someone else made money on their creations. But those YouTube's watchers shouldn't forget about people who are just fans of some content and use it in personal purposes only. Of course vids can be stolen and used by someone else, though there's for example an option that forbids embedding. Why don't they make something against any kinds of downloads and then ask those who post copyrighted stuff to apply it? True creative work loses its meaning and turns into a usual consumable product (like toilet paper for example). It's made for money people pay to have it in use. Isn't that... a bit weird? I mean - they don't make it to have it liked, the main purpose is making money. I don't think it's the best way for creative people.
Anything you've EVER posted on the net will NEVER disappear from there even if you delete it a million times. Someone has DEFINITELY saved it to their hard drive and one day might want to share it with someone. It's dangerous but on the other hand, isn't it a sign that what you posted is valuable enough to have interested something?
There are brand new things we have to deal with. The fact that we don't know how doesn't mean that the new stuff should be perceived as something bad. Why can't people try using it for their own good?
No comments:
Post a Comment