Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online • Hacker News Board

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#41

Post by gaius » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:30 AM UTC

adventured wrote: post #30

gaius wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A mentally unwell person is likely to feel targeted, oppressed, threatened, harmed, etc Interesting that we’re going for “mentally unwell” rather than “gun owner” this time.

> Interesting that we’re going for “mentally unwell” rather than “gun owner” this time. We're? Your response comes off as quite rude and dismissive. When in the past did I go for "gun owner" instead of "mentally unwell" or similar, such that your statement makes any sense? Your assumption/s about me and what I believe, have no place on HN, in my opinion. If you want to know what I think about something, you should as…

Not you in particular, the collective narrative.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#42

Post by Shank » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:31 AM UTC

avree wrote: post #26

Why was her YouTube channel nuked after this happening? Seems weird and dystopian, even if what she did was obviously very wrong.

The terms of service permits Google/YouTube to terminate an account for basically any reason. On a purely reactionary level, shooting at a company's employees is a pretty good reason for account termination.

Edit: As mentioned in an earlier thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16751945), apparently YouTube doesn't have a blanket account termination clause in the terms of service. I stand by my rationale, but want to make it clear that I actually got this wrong.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#43

Post by vowelless » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:31 AM UTC

Firstly, my sympathies with the people at Youtube HQ. I have many, many friends in the bay area and so this kind of thing hits close to home.

Secondly, I struggle when thinking about if we should give airtime to a shooter's grievances, or reasons. Or even mention who they are. I tend to be on the side of: don't give them any air time. And certainly, don't acquiesce to this type of behavior because it is almost by definition "terrorism" (using violence to cause change in policies).

On the other hand, I have been hearing a lot about YouTube demonitization, censorship, etc. Should this shooting be a part of the discussion about censorship? Should YouTube and the tech community let it affect the discourse around censorship?

I don't know.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#44

Post by danso » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:33 AM UTC

vesrah wrote: post #27

tristanj wrote: post #18

Looks like this is the culprit's website http://www.nasimesabz.com/index.html There are links to her (4?) youtube accounts, which have all been terminated. There's a link to her instagram, which has also been terminated, however there is a cached-copy here http://www.pictame.com/tag/yesilnasim

Here is a mirror of her videos http://www.dailymotion.com/yesilnasim

There is a video in which she's edited footage from "America's Got Talent" with footage of her performing a cringey act. Can't tell if it's meant to be tongue-in-cheek parody or if she's being delusional about being TV famous: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5dax32

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#45

Post by celdon25 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:33 AM UTC

idlewords wrote: post #38

Please consider not giving this person the online attention she sought as a result of her actions, and join me in flagging stories that dwell on her motives.

Good luck with that. The cat's out of the bag, and this may be the shot that was heard round the world.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#46

Post by komali2 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:33 AM UTC

Shank wrote: post #33

mankash666 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a pity that Google terminated those accounts - I don't know what scrutiny scares them. As for the lady, she seems to genuinely believe in veganism and fitness. Whatever weird things she did to propagate that seemed to be working (330K views?!!). Why she resorted to gun violence is much awaited.

> I don't know what scrutiny scares them To be fair, YouTube/Google just had an active shooter on their campus. If there's anything that justifies terminating someone's account, it would be opening fire on the company directly and injuring people.

You made me scroll through the youtube TOS to see if that was considered a violation.

As far as I can tell it's technically not... in fact, I can't even find a blanket "YouTube reserves the right to remove any content, for any reason, whatsoever" statement. They don't actually need to state that in the TOS, because they do have that right, but, still.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#47

Post by chapill » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:33 AM UTC

idlewords wrote: post #38

Please consider not giving this person the online attention she sought as a result of her actions, and join me in flagging stories that dwell on her motives.

Please consider reading the guidelines of this site. I'm sure that dang is reading these.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#48

Post by bitumen » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:33 AM UTC

celdon25 wrote: post #34

mankash666 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a pity that Google terminated those accounts - I don't know what scrutiny scares them. As for the lady, she seems to genuinely believe in veganism and fitness. Whatever weird things she did to propagate that seemed to be working (330K views?!!). Why she resorted to gun violence is much awaited.

> Why she resorted to gun violence is much awaited. My theory is this: I went through some of her past images. One of them showed a picture of a dog that was being mutilated (alive). She states that dogs in China are skinned alive because they believe that it makes the meat taste better. Well, that is going to invoke strong feelings, especially if that's part of your core cause (to expose the mistreatment of animals…

For her personal site:

BE AWARE! Dictatorship exists in all countries but with different tactics! They only care for personal short term profits & do anything to reach their goals even by fooling simple-minded people, hiding the truth, manipulating science & everything, putting public mental & physical health at risk, abusing non-human animals, polluting environment, destroying family values, promoting materialism & sexual degeneration in the name of freedom,..... & turning people into programmed robots! "Make the lie big, Make it simple, Keep saying it, And eventually they will believe it" Adolf Hitler... There is no free speech in real world & you will be suppressed for telling the truth that is not supported by the system. Videos of targeted users are filtered & merely relegated, so that people can hardly see their videos!

Yeah I think you’re onto something. I’m also sure that pictures of animals a lot of people in Youtube’s major markets see as pets being mutilated, generated scads of complaints. When you’re dealing with many millions of people, it is not unusual to respond to large concentrations of complaints. We should probably talk more about how thst works, and how it sometimes allows for careless or bad actors to silence people. Still, it’s understandable in a context other than attempting to be a censor, and just acting like a business. She comes across as angry and rigid in her views, but that describes quite a lot of people. Still, if someone “knows” something and is very angry, it can be hard to reach them.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#49

Post by danso » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:34 AM UTC

vowelless wrote: post #43

Firstly, my sympathies with the people at Youtube HQ. I have many, many friends in the bay area and so this kind of thing hits close to home. Secondly, I struggle when thinking about if we should give airtime to a shooter's grievances, or reasons. Or even mention who they are. I tend to be on the side of: don't give them any air time. And certainly, don't acquiesce to this type of behavior because it is almost by def…

YouTube (and other social media services) usually take down the accounts of headline-making killers. You're asking if they should make an exception in this case?

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

#50

Post by adventured » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 4:34 AM UTC

gaius wrote: post #41

adventured wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting that we’re going for “mentally unwell” rather than “gun owner” this time. We're? Your response comes off as quite rude and dismissive. When in the past did I go for "gun owner" instead of "mentally unwell" or similar, such that your statement makes any sense? Your assumption/s about me and what I believe, have no place on HN, in my opinion. If you want to know what I think about something, you should as…

Not you in particular, the collective narrative.

Right, that's my point: I'm not the collective narrative, I'm an individual person, with a mix of beliefs and thoughts on any given subject. You apparently assumed I was projecting something (a narrative?), based on some past experiences you've had.

If your guess is incorrect about what I believe and why I'm saying what I am, what then? That's why you ask.