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

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

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 439 posts

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

#381

Post by banned1 »

bilbo0s wrote: post #144
banned1 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo! Think Antifa or the students protesting someone at school and not letting them speak.

Your comment does illustrate my point. YOU value the free speech of whoever is speaking, but not that of the counter protesters. Who themselves value THEIR free speech, but not that of whoever is speaking. It's an intractable problem really.

But the counter protesters are free to organize their own speaker engagement. They ARE allowed to speak about their position. My point was that there is lack of civility in discourse. What's the point of interrupting another speaker? Let every speaker speak their mind, in an orderly manner, without interruption.

The problem is that some groups have defined "intolerance of intolerance" to be somewhat good, so then discourse stops.

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

#382

Post by aninhumer »

watwut wrote: post #375
aninhumer wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It makes as much sense as caving to any other form of terrorism. Addressing the systemic reasons behind hostile actors does not mean "caving" to the actors themselves. Should we let ISIS take over the Middle East and establish a fascist theocratic state? No, obviously not. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't carefully consider how the past decades of violent imperialist foreign policy might have played a significant…

By this logic, systemic reason behind "lovesick" teenager shooting former girlfriend is that girls sometimes stop dating boys. Girls should think again before rejecting boys. And black churches should think again about praying, because Dylan Roof had shoot them. Neither Austin bomber nor Parkland shooter explained why they did it, but whatever they states reasons, the objects of their hate don't necessary have respon…

>So no, the "youtube can not demonetize videos" straightforward nonsense is not an analysis of systemic reasons behind this shooting.

Indeed it is not, but that would be a very shallow reading of the systemic arguments made in this thread.

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

#383

Post by Mithaldu »

jacquesm wrote: post #366
Mithaldu wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's the point. Youtube is an extraordinary business with an utter monopoly.

Youtube doesn't really have a monopoly on the business of serving video. What they do have a monopoly on is the ability to get 100's of thousands of people to be directed to your video even if you yourself only do a fraction of the work required. This combination of technology and the audience is what makes Youtube so powerful. But if you are claiming ownership of revenues then you are indirectly claiming ownership o…

So they have a monopoly and are in a not-normal situation, and should've planned for this type of situation.

Thank you for agreeing.

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

#384

Post by Faark »

bo1024 wrote: post #214
INTPenis wrote: post #103

Americans in the comment section are reacting about this woman being a disgruntled user, angry about perceived discrimination from Youtube, down on her luck, suicidal. Me, a european, I'm reacting to how easily she found a gun. I hate to bring up this very toxic debate, my comment will seem like fishing for trouble. Yet you have to understand our perspective. Not every lunatic where I live can find a gun when they ne…

I would be really interested to see statistics about this. I hypothesize that the prevalence of "violent lunatics" is a bigger factor than availability of weapons, i.e. that the US just has more of these people than other places due to something in the media and culture. In other words, if availability of guns were really the most important factor, then wouldn't we expect Europe to have a similar number of attacks bu…

There probably has a huge cultural factor that people think at first of a gun as solution to their problem. Why not a bomb? Or poison? Or car? Burn down target property? So much options, but US culture seems to strongly favor guns. There is more than just availability. Glorification of guns (and solving problems using them) in US media might play a huge influence, and as a leading cultural influence might lead to similar problems else were in the world. But yeah, I'd love to see real studies about that. But those won't be easy, including the funding part...

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

#385

Post by peteey »

smoothgrips wrote: post #362
INTPenis wrote: post #103

Americans in the comment section are reacting about this woman being a disgruntled user, angry about perceived discrimination from Youtube, down on her luck, suicidal. Me, a european, I'm reacting to how easily she found a gun. I hate to bring up this very toxic debate, my comment will seem like fishing for trouble. Yet you have to understand our perspective. Not every lunatic where I live can find a gun when they ne…

> Not every lunatic where I live can find a gun when they need one While I agree it is more difficult to find a gun in Europe than in America, that doesn't mean that a lunatic _can't_ get a gun. Guns exist in EU countries that have very strict gun laws. If said lunatic was determined enough, they _will_ get their hands on one. > Despite these strict laws, France seems to be awash with guns. > In 2012, French authorit…

There is merit to making guns harder to find.

A crime motivated by anger might not happen if a few days pass while searching for a weapon. Passion fades with time

Effort is also a factor. Most people I have worked with will completely fail at a task if it requires them to get up from their desk and talk to someone. Finding a gun on the black market seems significantly harder than a shopping trip to Walmart

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

#386

Post by AstralStorm »

icebraining wrote: post #242
swalsh wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this view, platforms like Youtube (and Reddit) can't be allowed to hide behind this veil of being "private". As major platforms, they're important channels for speech. I think once a private company has amassed this level of the public attention their influence needs to be kept in check. The profits will stay private, but there needs to be limits on what they can "limit". I think it's a similar argument…

But YouTube is serving them - the videos are kept online. They just don't show ads on them.

But we allow people of colour to dine. As long as they keep to themselves in the separate room and pay a big premium.

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

#387

Post by forgottenpass »

INTPenis wrote: post #103

Americans in the comment section are reacting about this woman being a disgruntled user, angry about perceived discrimination from Youtube, down on her luck, suicidal. Me, a european, I'm reacting to how easily she found a gun. I hate to bring up this very toxic debate, my comment will seem like fishing for trouble. Yet you have to understand our perspective. Not every lunatic where I live can find a gun when they ne…

> There are always going to be disgruntled or unbalanced people

Well, yes, of course. But their overall number and the number willing to pick up arms are not immutable.

And americans are even less likley to do anything about that than they are gun ownership.

We've been taught not to focus on the fact we do basically zero for people in distress beyond making sure they don't kill themselves. Or try and understanding how and why society puts people into mental states such that they think violent outbursts are their only recourse. We've been taught to focus on guns. Not for it's utility in fixing the root cause, or proximate cause. We fixate on a "but for" cause, which also happens to be an entrenched political issue that makes for clickable coverage.

And once guns are banned, will we have our European friends smugly rolling their eyes that we obviously need to institute background checks to buy fertilizer from farm supply stores? And ought to abridge another right of Americans so we can finally scrub the Anarchist's Cookbook from the internet?

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

#388

Post by jacquesm »

Mithaldu wrote: post #383
jacquesm wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Youtube doesn't really have a monopoly on the business of serving video. What they do have a monopoly on is the ability to get 100's of thousands of people to be directed to your video even if you yourself only do a fraction of the work required. This combination of technology and the audience is what makes Youtube so powerful. But if you are claiming ownership of revenues then you are indirectly claiming ownership o…

So they have a monopoly and are in a not-normal situation, and should've planned for this type of situation. Thank you for agreeing.

Why do you feel that they should have planned for this type of situation?

You can't plan for 'crazy'.

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

#389

Post by AstralStorm »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #369
adnzzzzZ wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it's impossible to give quality communication to everyone This is wrong though. See Valve for a counter example. Steam is also run by algorithms but Valve has managed to give people tons of information on what their algorithms are doing at various points on their store ("this game was shown to you because of X, Y and Z", for instance). The communication problem that YouTube has can be solved by them improving their…

You can't compare communicating with users that are buying stuff (Steam customers) and communicating with paid creators (The 50M+ YouTube Channel content creators). It's a completely different set of questions/answers and a completely different relationship.

You can and he did. The main thing lacking in YouTube other than communication (which is not good - delays are inevitable but compete lack of is not) is actual reason. This is probably because they either cannot offer a real reason (either physically or because it'd expose the incompetence) or do not want it to be known (ulterior motives).

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

#390

Post by jmull »

nullifidian wrote: post #356
jmull wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the rationale: The advertisement pays for the video. Without the ads to provide money for a given type of video, there will be less of them and they will be less sophisticated. Thus, whether an advertiser likes it or not, they are supporting the video content, albeit indirectly. Also, I don't think advertisers care at all to engage in moralistic or political policing of content. They just want to sell stuff. B…

>The advertisement pays for the video. Advertisers pay for ad exposures on this platfrom, not for the video. The fact that some money goes not only for infrastructure but also to the creators, should be considered just a side effect of the need to increase viewcounts, and as a result ad exposures. Any attempt to associate particuilar algorithmically matched ads to videos and vice versa should be considered as a power…

I get that you have a different viewpoint.

I'm only explaining the viewpoint of others, not trying to argue to change yours. IMO, you're welcome to your viewpoint, if it doesn't involve harming others. Just understand that it isn't necessarily shared by the various actors in this situation and that if you understand their viewpoints you can better understand what's going on here.

Post reply on HN