It's expensive to host your own server. Unless you know what you're doing, it's expensive and there's a lot of security know-how or else every Russian and his mother are going to hack your server all day and night.Host shyt on your own stuff and you don't have to worry about edits.
You can't be mad when YouTube edits your stuff considering how big it is.
He is not the only one.
I know but people can't be mad with what they do to their content.It's expensive to host your own server. Unless you know what you're doing, it's expensive and there's a lot of security know-how or else every Russian and his mother are going to hack your server all day and night.
Youtube has a huge traffic volume too.
Yeah. Not to sound arrogant, but that contempt and slight is not working anymore breh. Its not that I agree with that site or any other site on every issue, cause I don't, but its 2016, not 2006 or 1996. As I said in the OP and thread, its the alt/indy media that was the real MVP of the election. If the alt/indy media was insignificant they wouldn't have made this provision to the NDAA.
Again, media that criticizes or provides an analysis not based in the status quo is alt/indy media. Umar, Tariq, and Boyce are all alt/indy media....how many times has Boyce said, they don't invite him to CNN anymore, because he is not going to play their game. The 1st Amendment protects all points of views, not just the views you agree with. Yet, this provision provides the basis to undermine it completely and arbitrarily.
This is wild stuff. It's been done incremementally for 15 years. They clip a piece off the Bill of Rights here, ignore it in the MSM, normalize it. Months later, water down an amendment there, let the MSM tell you we have to subvert freedom for "security" typically off of questionable premise like this Russia hack fable, normalize it. However, this is the first one of these incremental right removing laws that wholesale goes at the 1st Amendment.
Maybe I'm not cogently and precisely explaining the impact of this provision. I'm not sure what to say other than this is going to be the trampoline for literal censorship, fines, licenses and more to jump off against freedom of expression...which we are suppose to be free of obstructions through the 1st Amendment
As usual...jokers leap frog away from the point at hand....CNN reporter on a green screen boat...you can't handle the truth...wake up..
If he wasn't influential then why would Hillary feel the need to talk about him? If he wasn't influential then why do the multitude of heavy hitting guests who have worked in different sectors come on his show. He's independent and his own producer and not reading off a teleprompter, so he doesn't have to behave like a drone.
When you are I.N.D.E.P.E.ND.E.N.T. you can show your quirks and your true unfiltered personality.....See Boyce Watkins; See Tariq Nasheed...are they acting? Are they not providing the truth as they see it?
The pickle gate exposed the small lies they'll do. If they'll fabricate something so miniscule, then what won't they lie about.......like a man on a green screen boat.
Bring up insignificant points, when the thread topic is about censoring of the 1st Amendment on the internet
No, bare dedi server with 1TB hard drives can be had for $30-$50, even less if you keep lookingIt's expensive to host your own server. .
They're numerous tutorials available you can read to secure your server and they're people you can hire to protect it.Unless you know what you're doing, it's expensive and there's a lot of security know-how or else every Russian and his mother are going to hack your server all day and night.
Who gave them that? the same content creators they're fukking overYoutube has a huge traffic volume too.
Why is everything you post some contrarian attention whoring shytHost shyt on your own stuff and you don't have to worry about edits.
You can't be mad when YouTube edits your stuff considering how big it is.
He is not the only one.
im losthow exactly are they editing itwhat are they doing