Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized' • Hacker News Board

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#301

Post by jacquesm » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:58 PM UTC

rectang wrote: post #296

jacquesm wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully it would simply mean more customers for other hosting centers. If you feel that people should take up arms against AWS employees in that case then you have other problems. Business disputes are as old as businesses and we have ways to resolve those disputes: the courts. And be sure to read the fine print of any service or company that you are going to do business with if your business will be dependent on t…

The courts are for rich people. Suing a major corporation is all but hopeless. Practically, when you have a business dispute with a major corporation, your only option is to give up.

I've sued several very large corporations over the last 30 years and have to this date come out the winner in each and every case. Yes it cost some money but the pay-off was substantially higher than the money invested in the court case. And no, we were not rich by any definition.

In Europe the courts are still accessible for companies that do not have millions of $.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#302

Post by Klinky » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:58 PM UTC

ensignro2340 wrote: post #182

_delirium wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this kind of reaction is about philosophical "right" to an income from a particular company, more about sudden changes. It's similar to being fired: you previously got an income from this company, then they decided not to give you an income. Some people get angry at that, and sometimes feel desperate, worried about ending up homeless etc. depending on how much they relied on this income and what kinds o…

It's not similar to being fired. [REDACTED: It's similar to a store owner allowing you to panhandle outside their business, and then later telling you you can't panhandle there anymore (but loiter all you want!).] It is not reasonable for adults to look at internet ad revenue as a reliable source of income. It's unfortunate if/when they fall on hard times because they made the mistake of relying on something so volat…

As we slide more and more towards a "gig economy", not only can we underpay people, but we can also tell them they don't even have a "real job". Someone producing content for YouTube or driving for Lyft is a beggar? Get real.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#303

Post by mrtksn » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:58 PM UTC

post_break wrote: post #287

mrtksn wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have examples of mass acid attacks, mass stabbing attacks in Europe? Maybe we can do a quick sanity check for the hypothesis about lunatics using knives and acids when guns are not available? Sure, there were some jihadist attacks but these are institutional attacks, I can't really recall having any angry person going on a rampage. In Europe, the act of an angry or crazy person will probably result in a break…

Well if we're trying to lump the word "mass" into it then it gets to be tougher, here is an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Square_stabbing Acid attacks aren't broken down into how many victims so I can't find out if there were multiple injuries: https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/26/europe/london-acid-attacks-20... My point is that crazy finds a way. : https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-crime-murder/…

No, it doesn't have to be "mass". The question is, is it really the case that people use knives when guns are not available?

Your hypothesis is that people just use the next available weapon, which sounds logical, but is there any data to support it? Have the eurocrazies actually found a way, in general? Maybe most crazies just go and break furniture and laptops instead of stabbing when no guns are available? Maybe they just punch the person that they are unhappy with?

I mean, Europe is around for long enough time so we should have enough data to come to a definitive answer to the question instead of repeating it every time the subject comes in, right? Do people actually use knives when guns are not available and no significant safety benefit is achieved by the European approach?

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#304

Post by txsh » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:58 PM UTC

AlexC04 wrote: post #32

sqdbps wrote: post #2

The media’s part in this: For whatever reason they started scouring youtube for “controversial” videos checking if they had ads (no matter how little views they had) then they would contact the advertisers for comment. Advertisers would initiate damage control and pull their ads from youtube. Youtube would explain that the numbers and views in question are insignificant and that this type of complex system can never…

> Be sure to remind youtube of their power and responsibility after tragedy strikes. To be clear - they aren't actually responsible for an active shooter showing up on campus. It sounds like you're saying they could have some responsibility in someone coming to their office with a gun.

They absolutely are responsible.

Imagine if Uber started randomly denying drivers payment, taking away their source of income for arbitrary reasons with no chance of appeal. It would only be a matter of time before someone showed up at their door with a gun.

Only the shooter is guilty of the crime. But YouTube is responsible. And the courts will agree when the victims sue.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#305

Post by tootie » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:59 PM UTC

hliyan wrote: post #3

sqdbps wrote: post #2

The media’s part in this: For whatever reason they started scouring youtube for “controversial” videos checking if they had ads (no matter how little views they had) then they would contact the advertisers for comment. Advertisers would initiate damage control and pull their ads from youtube. Youtube would explain that the numbers and views in question are insignificant and that this type of complex system can never…

The irony is that reporters themselves are driven by advertising pressure. I'm fond of saying that "any premise that can attract eyeballs will eventually appear as an article on an ad-revenue-driven website".

That law is not absolute since reporter's value is ostensibly tied to their reputation and credibility.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#306

Post by whywhywhywhy » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:59 PM UTC

thefounder wrote: post #116

deftnerd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While they're not directly responsible, the problem was entirely of their making. They created a whole new profession (even my 8-year-old son wants to grow up to be a "professional youtubber") and then arbitrarily destroy careers. The created an environment where people could work hard to create their own destiny while giving themselves the ability to destroy those destinies without cause or recourse. It was only a m…

People ahould not put too much trust in youtube-like companies. If you have a youtube career you don't really have a real career/job. You just found a way to make easy bucks. Youtube is not the "internet" of videos. You can have your own website

It goes both ways, YouTube willingly starts business agreements with these people and makes money off their content.

You can't act shocked and surprised if a mentally ill person snaps when you've been happily profit sharing that mentally ill persons content and then change the deal.

YouTube/Google likes to think these relationships are all one way and not think about the consequences of their choices and algorithms on peoples lives. I'm actually surprised it took this long for this to happen, it was a morbid inevitability in my eyes.

If YouTube/Google can't understand when money is involved actions have consequences then maybe the whole partner program should be scrapped.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#307

Post by _bxg1 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:59 PM UTC

pg_bot wrote: post #294

_bxg1 wrote: post #136

No sane person would argue that what she did was okay. With that disclaimer, I can't help but feel sorry for her. In the unregulated gig/"creator" economy, someone's entire career - not just their livelihood but their life's work - can be wiped out in an instant. In her case it doesn't even sound like it was intentional. An algorithmic blip. That kind of hopeless, pointless loss would make anybody's mental health tak…

Explain what you mean by your last sentence.

I'm no expert in these matters so I'm not very qualified to give specifics, but roughly:

1) Something modelled after employment regulation to protect people whose full-time income comes from these platforms. There are tons of rules designed to protect employees which services like YouTube and Uber have been dodging (and actively fighting) for years.

2) Something like common-carrier status to protect the users of the most critical platforms (Google search, Facebook, etc.).

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#308

Post by jacquesm » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 3:00 PM UTC

kita99 wrote: post #291

jacquesm wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This echos the classic dropbox comment, "you can just do it yourself". A layperson isn't going to. Then you will have to live with being dependent on the whims of another entity. Which means you give up a lot of your freedoms. > As the facebook controversies have show, people have a remarkably bad time using common sense and making rational decisions on the internet This wasn't 'on the internet', this was about as…

In a society you can’t live without depending on another entity, person or corporation. We don’t have time for everything, at some point we have to outsorce work. Did you write the OS used to start up your browser/app to type this comment? Just because we agreed to depend on others doesn’t mean they can shit on us.

> Did you write the OS used to start up your browser/app to type this comment?

Funny, I did actually write an OS, and no it is not the one on my computer but the one that is on my computer is open source and I know I can rely on it for ever because I have that source and know how to use a compiler.

Yes, that's a conscious decision.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#309

Post by emodendroket » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 3:00 PM UTC

fixermark wrote: post #298

emodendroket wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Migrating off of AWS is a difficult, drawn-out process which can take months, if you've got a lot of stuff there or are using a lot of AWS-specific features. That's part of why I chose that example. A lot of businesses a lot of people here work for would be in quite difficult straits if that happened.

... but the fact remains: AWS is a service provided by a private corporation, not the government. There's no requirement or mandate in criminal law that it exist or continue to function. It could be dropped without warning at any time, and the only recourse customers would have is whatever contracts provide for them. This isn't something Amazon would do, because "Leaving millions of dollars of revenue on the table" i…

Well, again, I'm not advocating murder. But cris de coueur about changes to services like AWS or the App Store get plenty of upvotes and attention here, while the attitude toward people trying to make a living off of YouTube is different. Why?

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#310

Post by root_axis » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 3:01 PM UTC

danso wrote: post #97

deftnerd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While they're not directly responsible, the problem was entirely of their making. They created a whole new profession (even my 8-year-old son wants to grow up to be a "professional youtubber") and then arbitrarily destroy careers. The created an environment where people could work hard to create their own destiny while giving themselves the ability to destroy those destinies without cause or recourse. It was only a m…

So basically every company who has ever laid off or fired an employee should expect at some point to fall victim to a mass shooting?

Yes? This is not something new in the age of mass shootings, e.g. "going postal" has long been used as a crude shorthand to describe homicidal violence perpetrated by disgruntled employees. In cases such of those we never have a problem condemning the violence while simultaneously recognizing qualities of the work environment that led the employee to the disgruntled state.