Nine Theses on Wikipedia - Larry Sanger
2258 Views - 1 day ago
BitChute
15.6K Subscribers
Sensitivity - Normal (BBFC 12)
10/22 - 11am ET. Don't miss this important discussion! Jeffrey Wernick speaks with Larry Sanger—the philosopher and internet pioneer who helped launch Wikipedia—to uncover what really happens behind the world’s largest online encyclopedia. From Wikipedia’s founding ideals to today’s controversies ov...
Show more


(50)NewestOldestPopular
(50)
Newest
NewestOldestPopular
BitChute
Support Bitchute by becoming a member https://www.bitchute.com/membership/configure/

For questions related to the platform. Leave your questions in the comments section of my video, where I looks forward to addressing them - Ray Vahey, CEO of Bitchute

https://www.bitchute.com/video/BNOxpKTyPRrF
[ show more ]
··
blanco white_EHLF
Charlie-kirk-4444444444trump00000000000000huajuapan When Jordan won his third championship, his father was murdered, and when Kawhi won his second, his sister was imprisoned. Anyone who challenges the NBA gets into trouble. Kawhi's story is similar to Jordan's.
····
billyjones
WATCH THIS 2 HR VATICAN VID.. THEY CUT OUT 400 YEARS.. AT 600, THEY JUST MADE IT THEY YEAR 1000.. ITS REALLY 1625 - https://www.bitchute.com/video/WhqWf4RQyqp2/
····
TheStinkingBishop
Where once I spent a fair bit of time on bitchute, these days it needs to be something fairly important pertaining to me for me to watch and no i didn't watch a second of this.
Good job on the ads, fucknuts.
🖕
[ show more ]
····
911LookuptheLavonAffair
How do you guys make this many videos and somehow avoid the Israel topic? Amazing.
····
denationalizedmoney21.
I am less interested in foreign policy. nor do I have any obsession with respect to Israel. But on multiple occasions I have made my opinion clear. I think Bibi is a war criminal. I think Israel has committed genocide. I believe the USA has aided and abetted that genocide. I believe the USA should have cut off all aid to Israel. America should neither help fund Israel nor arm Israel. Also, I have reached out to Palestinian groups to do a podcast with me. I want to give them an audience where their voices can be heard. Yet none, to date, have accepted my offer. I very much want to give Palestinians a voice so that more people are made aware of the atrocities committed by Israel and how their voices are being suppressed, throttled and criminalized in the USA.
[ show more ]
····
alsnedd2000
wikipedia is very tainted misinformation the new 1984 encyclopedia wrong think will not be printed.
····
Icorhombus
It gained traction in the first place because it was originally the exact opposite.
····
Carl Jito
The main difference is that libertarianism prioritizes individual liberty above all else, advocating for the smallest possible government, while conservatism often subordinates individual liberty to other values like tradition, religion, and national security. Libertarians believe the government's role is limited to protecting individual rights, whereas conservatives may support government intervention to uphold morality and order.

The problem with Libertarianism is that those that call themselves libertarian most likely think of a LIBERTINAGE way of life.
What is "Libertinage"?
Libertinage is a way of life characterized by a rejection of social, moral, and religious conventions in favor of unrestricted, often hedonistic or "dissolute," behavior. The term refers to the practices or habits of a libertine, a person who lives a life of pleasure without regard for conventional morality. Historically, it emerged in France and England in the 18th and 19th centuries as a philosophical concept emphasizing personal liberation from traditional authority.
Key characteristics
Rejection of authority:
A core aspect is the disregard for and rejection of established moral, social, and religious norms.
Focus on personal freedom:
It emphasizes individual autonomy and liberty, often leading to a pursuit of pleasure and happiness.

Hedonistic lifestyle:This can involve leading a dissolute life and indulging in sensual, often sexual, pleasures without concern for social or moral restrictions.

Historical context:The term gained prominence in the 17th and 18th centuries, particularly in France, with figures like the Marquis de Sade associated with the philosophy and literary genre.

Cheers!
👍😎
[ show more ]
····
View all 3 replies
Carl Jito
Ooopsie, I had a Biden moment there:
Similarities between Libertarianism and Conservativism:
Limited government: Both generally favor a smaller government with limited scope and power.
Free markets: Both are strong proponents of free-market capitalism and fiscal discipline.
Individual liberty: Both value individual liberty, though they prioritize it differently and believe it can be subordinate to other values

There.
····
MarxismForFaggots
Libertardism doesn't protect White people and you know that, kike
····
Carl JitoMarxismForFaggots
Actually it does. It lets trailer trash like you, a loser, come here, post your shit and show us what an ignorant you are.
Yo, Bro! Get an effing life and stop obsessing about Israel and the Jews. You're a sick fk.
Cheers.
[ show more ]
····
Death2islam
Whatever jew say...
····
Ted_D
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/larrysanger for Larry Sanger on Bitchute.
····
Daniel B·
I bet Ray regrets his joke to name the U.S. company that owns BitChute, Deep State Protocol LLC, with no end of BitChute users pointing at this as evidence BitChute is a deep-state "honeypot", where given how much grief this has caused, could the company be renamed?
····
View all 9 replies
denationalizedmoney21.
The name was chosen by consensus. And meant as irony. To me and to some of the other investors, the enemy is not a deep state, but the state itself. so, speaking on my own behalf, talking about a deep state is a distraction from the real problem, the state itself. the fact that so much information is classified, so little transparency, so little oversight, so little is made available to the public should be more than enough evidence that there is no movement to really eliminate a deep state. parties want to control the swamp. not drain it. so this deep state talk, IMO, is nonsense. a distraction. the problem is the state itself. I do not take seriously those claims made by some. no matter what we do, their opinion will not change. I would not change the name because there a people without any sense of irony nor a sense of humor. I speak only for myself.
····
Daniel B·denationalizedmoney21.
I hear you, but the trouble is this created an unnecessary point of friction, as whilst some users are most certainly using this as an excuse to attack the site, I'm sure there are also everyday users who simply take this at face value, when wouldn't you want to eliminate anything that potentially harms the brand, as this is one fight that didn't need to be?
····
Ted_Ddenationalizedmoney21.
The "deep state" is very real, and absolutely seems to control "the state(s)" (though I recognize the state beyond a bare minimum to be immoral as well) through blackmail and things like the control of media, banking, "law", "entertainment", "education", etc.

Much better to choose a name that aligns with legitimate values than to associate with an evil entity, even in jest IMO.
····
AshkeNAZI.
Ray thinks he can just imagine or lie away that he wasn't part of what was done to my family and the unconstitutional shit that was done to me. This POS is involved in protecting pedophiles, the proof is Bethany Shuler and what she did to my kid, Bitchute helped her and the feds spin me into being the bad guy out of thin air, this is proof he is part of the grooming of children to be associated with any part of what that cunt Shuler got away with doing to my daughter. See you around Ray you can bet on it buddy.
····
denationalizedmoney21.Ted_D
again. we are not aligning with that. the name is ironic. we are ridiculing the concept. again. the problem is the state itself. the more we talk about the deep state the more we are distracted from the real problem, the state itself.
····
Ted_Ddenationalizedmoney21.
Yes I get that the name is ironic, what I'm suggesting is that associating with evil names is intrinsically unwise, unless perhaps as a way of pure satire with a lot of associated meme-ing or similar behind it to educate people and make them laugh at the evildoers.

I'm far from being a big statist (somewhere between libertarian and ancap), but the chance of people abandoning statism anytime soon is pretty much zero, in the US or elsewhere outside perhaps of some small indigenous tribes. The US without the influence of the deep state owning banking and buying up/exerting massive control over culture by all means at its disposal would probably by most people's estimation (most liberty-minded people included) be a pretty great place to live though, even with minimal Constitutional government as laid out by the Founding Fathers.

In our day however we have the deep state worldwide engaged in a long-planned wealth & power grab and mass-murder campaign via the "pandemic" and "covid vaccines" and looking to turn people everywhere into serfs or similar under a globalist control grid run by them.. so to dismiss them as not "the real problem" or anything similar is intrinsically risky IMO.
····
denationalizedmoney21.Ted_D
our fiscal deficits is turning people into serfs. the warfare state has enabled the surveillance state. and wide out in the open. the regulatory state has created a society where doing almost anything requires government permission. and, again, wide out in the open. it is not hidden. not clandestine. it is wide out in the open. for everyone to see. and the answer to banking is, IMO, bitcoin.
····
Ted_Ddenationalizedmoney21.
And my question would be who is pushing communism and similar (feminism, postmodernism, nihilism, etc.) via schools, publishing, and "entertainment", who owns the banks that have implemented fiat debt-notes lent out at interest instead of lawful money issued by the US treasury (and how does this compare to when lawful currency was in place in the US), who has bought out politicians and judges (including via owning things like pharma companies which can exert lots of influence with monetary donations, including by way of suppressing natural healing tools and techniques), and who blackmails "power players" on a global scale (see J. Epstein as one example of this) to act as they wish instead of as their constituents would prefer?

Also, who funds the wars (not to mention lobbying for them), and how much fewer and shorter in duration would vars via the US and worldwide throughout history be if said funding was limited to the spending of stored financial reserves of the warring parties? What forces are funding "15 minute cities" and the global warming nonsense used to scare people into into such things and similar worldwide?

Lots of dark stuff is hidden, everyone able should know their external enemies so that they might be dealt with, giving the rest of us a fair shot at working out our problems without them exerting massive subversive efforts against us without our knowledge or consent.
[ show more ]
····
denationalizedmoney21.Ted_D
Unfortunately this is what most Americans want. they want a big government. they want privileges. they want subsidies. they want the right to spend other peoples money. they support Ponzi finance. they support counterfeit money. they believe in the economic equivalent to the tooth fairy, the free lunch. they believe in surveillance. they believe in a system where just about everything requires permission. the people want a lot. but they do not want to pay for it. and people want to control the behavior of other people. the people want a lot of regulation. the people lobby for preferences. all parties want to operate in secrecy. because they want as much unchecked power as possible. so the only way to defeat a deep state is too significantly shrink the state. neither party wants to drain the swamp. they want to own and control the swamp. so, again, the real problem is the state itself. whatever is hidden, and I am sure a lot os hidden; it is not hidden by the deep state but hidden at the request of the state itself which does not want to disclose to the people.
[ show more ]
····
TarotQueen669
Hey Bitchute. Why let these guys mute?
····
View all 14 replies
Daniel B·
When you say "these guys", I'm not following who you're referring to (Jeffrey, or BitChute themselves don't mute or block users, only preventing certain user accounts from commenting if they violate BitChute's T&Cs, such as professional SPAMMERS), but if you're asking "why have a mute feature", it's simply one's own personal comment filter, which I introduced (I've long been responsible for the commenting system) because those posting "it's the Jews" comments were getting completely out of hand (at one point they were the top comment on every popular video!), with it not impacting other users, and just like IRL, you can choose who you want to hear from, however, I do recommend using the feature sparingly (I hardly mute anyone these days), as whilst you might strongly disagree with one particular point of view, you may well agree with others.
····
TarotQueen669Daniel B·
Yeah thanks, I understand the redundancy. I just see some people curating the comment section via the mute filter.
····
Daniel B·TarotQueen669
To be clear, users can't curate your comment section, only their own, and if they mute you, you can still read their comments, which is how I typically roll.

Channels blocking users for merely having a counter point of view is very much antithetical to the ideals of FREE SPEECH though, but Ray has a great answer to this, which I've already added support for to the commenting system, which is a CommentFreely site where there is NO "blocking" of users, on which you can comment on any Web page, including BitChute videos where the comments have been turned off (users you've muted still apply though 😉, as you don't want their comments showing up there).
····
genkiferalDaniel B·
I'd rather have the ability to block certain channels - ones that lie often and ones that mute me for disagreeing with them.
····
Daniel B·genkiferal
That's a feature that's been requested by a good few, including myself, and is hopefully near the top of improvements that are "in the wings".
····
Ted_DDaniel B·
I also support a way to see who each channel has muted, i.e. they can mute users but you can see if they are censorious and hypocritical (posting videos on a free-speech site then muting users for disagreeing with them).

Hasn't gotten any traction yet but I see no reason why it wouldn't work, it's not like the mute list should obviously be private and it would be good if people could see if the content creator has this measure of integrity - with open comments (minus serious trolls and haters) also being important to educate people and dispute bad ideas in the videos via a simple feature like this.
····
Daniel B·Ted_D
I'm sure you meant to say "channel has muted blocked" (yay, I found a reason to use the strikeout style 😉), as the difference is quite straightforward, as "blocking" is something only a channel owner can do, which prevents a user from participating in the channel's comment section (their existing comments aren't shown, and they're prevented from adding new comments, or interacting with other users comments). Muting on the other hand is a user level feature, which anyone can use, which as I say acts as one's personal comment filter.

But on your point, about showing which users a channel has blocked, as a way to gauge the level of FREE SPEECH the channel permits; perhaps that wouldn't be violating a channel's privacy, as the fact they've blocked someone is something they've provably done (the reason they've done this they may well not want to divulge), however, a more straightforward approach might be to simply indicate how many users the channel has blocked, as this alone would give you a good idea of whether the channel is open to debate (it should be noted that some discretion would need to be applied to such a figure, because if a channel is meant to be "family friendly", this could simply be the number of users who aren't willing to play fair, i.e. were posting highly inappropriate comments, given the channel content).
····
Ted_DDaniel B·
I prefer listing the people, as one could get a rash of spam accounts over some short timeframe and mute them all (though maybe they could be removed from the list as the site gets rid of them), or they could choose to mute users widely known to be trolls/haters/etc. or conversely choose to mute users who are challenging to their ideas in a generally reasonable, non-rude/non-trollish manner.

In addition to this (or as an alternative, though a less-good one IMO) there could be a way to see what percentage of commenters a channel has blocked and/or non-spam account comments removed, and how this compares to similar channels on the site, perhaps by percentile of censorship.

Yet another idea would be to put a small icon on channel names that shut down comments entirely, and ideally allow them to be filtered from view as well.
····
Daniel B·Ted_D
I'll respond when you've edited your comment to say block, not mute 😉 (as I just went to the trouble of explaining the difference)
····
Fate AccompliDaniel B·
Maybe you can answer a question for me.
If I mute someone, does that mean that they can comment on my channel without me seeing their comments?
····
Daniel B·Fate Accompli
Indeed, where whilst you may not want to see comments from some users, if you believe in the principal of FREE SPEECH, you can choose to not block them from commenting on your videos, still allowing other users to see their comments, where I've implemented an enhancement that is ready to be installed, that allows all users to reload the comments with the muted comments included (I indicate how many comments have been muted), which as a channel owner you can use to review these comments, and decide whether you want to go as far as also blocking these users, but like with mute, I would highly recommend only blocking users in extreme cases (NOTE: I implemented an instaNUKE feature that allows us to immediately take care of the professional SPAMMERS (for accounts that have only recently been created), to save everyone else (including channel owners) the trouble).
····
Fate AccompliDaniel B·
With all due respect, I wasn't asking for a lecture on free speech, nor anything having to do with blocking comments on my channel, so let me rephrase my simple question:
If I'm perusing BitChute and come across a person whose comments I disagree with or find objectionable for some reason, and I mute this person, thereby hiding their comments from me, will this person be able to post comments on MY channel without me seeing them?
It's a simple question with a Yes or No answer.
····
Daniel B·Fate Accompli
Steady on there, where how often is it that you get to talk directly with the developer of a core feature on the site (the commenting system), where I did effectively give you a "yes or no" answer, with "Indeed" (i.e. "yes"), and I then went on to outline how I've reasonably addressed this issue, of channel owners not being able to monitor (see) the comments of users they've muted (without viewing the comments whilst logged off), which my upgrade addresses quite well, and also allows ALL users to periodically review the comments from users they've chosen to mute, which I will be taking advantage of myself, such as where I spot that there are quite a few comments that have been muted, as I also give the option to directly unmute a user (via the comment button), if you change your mind (without having to unmute them via the existing Unmute popup).
[ show more ]
····
Fate AccompliDaniel B·
In that case, I have simple suggestion.
I would suggest that whenever a person is muted, that they are also automatically blocked from commenting on the channel of the person who did the muting.
This is not complicated. If I mute someone, I obviously would not want them commenting on my own channel, since I wouldn't be able to see their comments. I think this is true WITHOUT EXCEPTION.
This is the reason I have not muted anyone. I'm not going to mute someone only to have them troll my own channel and videos without me seeing their comments. That would be ridiculous.
[ show more ]
····
genkiferal
BitChute needs to offer users the ability to mute certain channels that lie a lot or waste our time with too much filler material and too few facts.

I read a bit about the co-founder leaving Wikipedia and why. Good move to leave. Humans tend to think that "the people" will do a better job than a tyrant or a small group of leaders, but "the people" concept is easy enough to manipulate. "Hive mind" or "group think" is just as terrifying - if not more so because "the people" tend to also take on the role of punisher or enforcer.
[ show more ]
····
View all 7 replies
denationalizedmoney21.
IMO, we need to develop more powerful tools for everyone on BitChute to curate, moderate and personalize their own experience on BitChute that reflect their own preferences. BitChute is a free speech platform more faithful to free speech absolutism than any other platform. And more committed to privacy. we are also anti-authoritarian. we do not want to make choices for others. those platforms with algorithms have the algorithms make choices for others. That is authoritarianism, IMO. IMO, any algorithm should be optional. selected by the people. they should have choices. and the algorithms need to be transparent. tools should all be user-controlled and personalized and unique for them and the experience they want. In the near future Ray will be reaching out to the community to get input on this and other topics. how people choose their own experience has no impact on the choices others make regarding their preferences. as Milton Friedman so aptly put it, we want people to be free to choose.
····
genkiferaldenationalizedmoney21.
I've noticed that not enough channels use accurate titles or use tags. That would help both audience and channel. Perhaps BitChute could do a very short tutorial for channels to help them get more viewers - or at least, a more accurate following of more loyal viewers?
····
Ted_Ddenationalizedmoney21.
Absolutely agree with the idea of the algorithm being transparent, even if only to allow for positive modification via "the wisdom of the crowd", either via the site or via add-ons.
····
denationalizedmoney21.genkiferal
Thank you! I think that is an excellent suggestion. Actually I think our tutorials have much room for improvement. I will ask Ray to have a tutorial produced to help people tag and title more accurately.
····
Alex - BitChute Support
Thanks for your feedback! The channel mute feature, which lets users hide channels from their view, is something we’re working on and hope to release soon. If you have any more suggestions, please feel free to email support@bitchute.com we really appreciate your input!
····
Ted_Dgenkiferal
Another idea would be to let channel viewers to vote on - and change with enough votes - the tabs, or simply add up to three of their own to make for a better search experience (related, a lot of votes on either set could mean more exposure for those looking for those tabs than zero or a few votes on videos with similar viewership).
[ show more ]
····
denationalizedmoney21.Ted_D
we are very interested in improving the search experience. we are aware that the current search function is quite inadequate. it is likely that sometime in November we will replace the current search engine with something better. and we have plans to make it much more robust in 2026. I will share your suggestions with the team. we would like the participation from everyone. another project we are moving towards implementation is a community forum. I will suggest to Ray to hold a townhall livestream to discuss these topics and everyone can provide their feedback.
[ show more ]
····
powlpowl
Misspelled thesis?
····
genkiferal
thesis is singular and theses is plural?
····
denationalizedmoney21.genkiferal
correct. theses is the plural of thesis.
····

No comments
Next Video