Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online

nbcbayarea.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 491 posts

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

#121

Post by Jesus_Jones »

nailer wrote: post #97
Jesus_Jones wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This got too long, but to summarize my point there's a vast amount of content on the internet and those people feeling that someone not finding them via google is a cheat are over-reacting. The world is so big that there are lots of people no one ever hears about, who may be doing interesting stuff. Feeling that people don't find your cool stuff is a complaint you can make against google, facebook, instagram, maybe b…

> those people feeling that someone not finding them via google is a cheat are over-reacting. > So all these people mad that they don't have lots of viewers That's not the issue at all. They're mad they HAVE lots of views and their videos are being demonetised, and the rules around demonetisation aren't enforced consistently.

okay, maybe i don't get that. Is that what the point that was in the supposed shooter's screen grab with 300k views and 10c of payment was about? I had forgotten about the problems around terrorist or violent racist videos and ads for random stuff showing up on them so youtube was going to cut off advertising on such videos - I guess google screwed it up and went too far?

It seems very unfair the way this works at youtube and there's no human to appeal to. I can see that would be frustrating. So there's no other place to take their videos to get money?

I remember a time when there wasn't a place where people could get money for playing video games, except maybe a few people working at computer magazines writing reviews.

But I also still think theres also a lot of similar content for certain broad categories. Like say exercise videos.

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

#123

Post by nailer »

celdon25 wrote: post #70
aaaaaaaaaaa12 wrote: post #59

One of her complaints was that YouTube age-restricted her yoga videos (which were modest by Western standard, she was just wearing shorts, a shirt and no socks), while not age-restricting much more explicit Nicki Minaj and Miley Cyrus videos. Is there any explanation to why YouTube does this?

That depends on your definition of explanation. There are loads of complaints and theories. Here's the official policy: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en I'm really not a fan of the policy, and it would be a real shame if it wasn't changed. But it would also be a shame if it was changed because of a shooting. It shouldn't have come to this in the first place.

The presence of the 'Advertiser-friendly content guidelines' document isn't an answer to the question, which is why the guidelines aren't consistently applied.

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

#124

Post by Jesus_Jones »

aaomidi wrote: post #115

So looking at her videos on Telegram ( https://t.me/nasimesabz1 ), she was anti gun. She was a very weird individual with clear mental health issues. I don't even know what to make of most of her content on that channel.

Can you expand on that? Did she make irrational comments, accuse people of impossible acts, was she threatening? I looked at the 1.5 minute video someone copied out and she was upset but not frothing at the mouth.

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

#125

Post by Bukhmanizer »

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…

>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 think the answer to this is clearly no. I feel like people here feel very strongly about censorship, so maybe they'll disagree. But I think we need to get a bit of perspective here. She attempted to kill people to get what she wanted.

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

#126

Post by kbenson »

danso wrote: post #116
vowelless wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that is not what I am asking. In parallel, there has been a conversation going on about demonitization, censorship, etc (see the removal of the gun videos recently). My question is, should such a shooting have any impact on that conversation? I feel like we should restrain ourselves from letting violent acts like this impact those conversations, even if the violent acts were done "in the name of" fighting against…

> My question is, should such a shooting have any impact on that conversation? Did you expect that the shooting would have a meaningful impact in the debate? Certainly, people will mention her name in the next few months, because of the infamy of her acts. But no, I don't think Google is going to openly say that an attempted mass murder of their employees was an incentive or disincentive. For likely the same reason w…

> Did you expect that the shooting would have a meaningful impact in the debate?

Not upstream comment author, but I can see how it could. People make a living off YouTube. YouTube purposefully hides the metrics by which they judge videos and choose to promote them to or hide them from different audiences, and which cause a video to become demonetized, which means no revenue can be obtained from it. They have valid reasons for wanting to do this (which isn't to say those reasons should win out in the end, it's an active debate AFAIK), but on the other hand they heavily encourage content creators to make it their full time job and embrace YouTube.

The stress of having your livelihood drastically affected due to an algorithm change in some opaque way that nobody will explain may contribute heavily to stress individuals feel. That doesn't in any way excuse the actions of this person, but if it contributed, is this not a valid, if extreme, data point about the impact in people when they feel powerless and in the dark about their livelihood?

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

#127

Post by Jesus_Jones »

celdon25 wrote: post #99
mc32 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People need to realize that using "free" platforms, means they are beyond your control and your fate is up to their vagaries. I'm against censorship (private censorship which takes political sides especially) but ultimately, unless you're hosting your own content, just enjoy what you get for free while you can and don't bank on it. YT is not there to make _you_ money. They are there to make money for themselves. If y…

> People need to realize that using "free" platforms, means they are beyond your control and your fate is up to their vagaries. People need to realize that there is no such thing as free. Nobody is getting anything for free here, because usage of the service generates analytics data, and it goes into a thick file connected to your account. Those so-called "free" platforms also monopolize the market space, creating le…

you can use them without being tracked by watching in anon mode, or deleting your cookies first. google doesn't block you. i watch it that way all the time. and its free.

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

#128

Post by ravenstine »

matthewbauer wrote: post #81
ravenstine wrote: post #53

It turns out that when an organization applies rules arbitrarily, they eventually piss off the wrong person.

Sounds like you are blaming the victim.

YouTube as a company is the victim?

Even if it was, as opposed to the individual employees involved, victims can play a role in situations that come to be. Making an observation about this is not victim-blaming, nor does it absolve the aggressor.

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

#129

Post by Jesus_Jones »

mudil wrote: post #37
mudil wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why downvoting? We have an honest website since 2004! That's more than 14 years. We do interviews, reviews, conferences reports. Medical technologies: no politics, no controvertial content. All our staff is US and European-based MDs and PhDs, hard working professional people. And starting with Panda update by Google, we can barely survive... Read our account: the story is true and is very honest.

Maybe before downvoting people need to realize that Google, instead of fostering a better internet, by working on promoting honest and hard working publishers and creators, decided that it will concentrate on goals of increasing its own profitability? Do you see new publishers popping up on the internet? Have you heard of such as thing as VC investment rounds in start ups in publishing? No? Maybe Google has something…

well google is a money making enterprise, so is say medium, the blogging service. medium aren't doing anything to help other publishers, just themselves, right? i think google has done some stuff to help the world, the internet, but they are so big when they make changes to reduce spam say, millions or thousands of people get pushed out of the way too.

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

#130

Post by Jesus_Jones »

idlewords wrote: post #78
yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you have said the same thing about Mark Conditt? Or is there a difference? Should we talk about some murderers and not others? Was he a terrorist? Was she?

We know that reporting on a killer's identity and motives in detail encourages ideation in others. I think it's fine to talk about these people, but context is important. In this case, it appears to be someone who was frustrated with a lack of social media attention; we should be careful in not rewarding her heinous act in a way that encourages a future shooter.

i think its more likely she was frustrated at losing payment, which could be completely separate from "social media attention".
Post reply on HN