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

Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 373 posts

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#201

Post by a-non »

fzeroracer wrote: post #186
vuln wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s two websites. If you asked 1000 people about 4chan maybe 25% would know what is and would say it’s a troll website if they even what what it is. I think less know about 8chan. The media has driven so much traffic to the site. It’s almost as if they want people to radicalize because it will make great news. I digress just because we know what 4/8chan are I doubt most internet users do or care. we shouldn’t sign…

You're avoiding the point. As he mentioned, 4chan and co are the epitome of no-censorship and entirely free debate. Under the assumptions made in this thread, the free market of ideas should squash ideologues and people who choose to believe in things such as white supremacy or conspiracy theories. Yet this is not the case. Why?

Perhaps they contain an inconvenient grain of truth.

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#202

Post by anonytrary »

anigbrowl wrote: post #157
dbg31415 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> GoPro sells an official mount for mounting a camera on a rifle Is this something GoPro should be ashamed of? 99.99999% of gun owners aren't criminals.

You're off by about 3 orders of magnitude.

> 99.99999% being off by 3 orders of magnitude.

So you're implying that 99.99% of gun owners aren't criminals then?

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#203

Post by tuesdayrain »

peteradio wrote: post #184
zed88 wrote: post #135

I think censorship is not going to fix the issue, people have the right to see and face evil if they so wish to and have a strong heart. I am from NZ and a muslim and have watched the video myself an hour after the incident, I know people personally affected by this and I think we all need to come together as human beings and understand that there are some evil ideas and people everywhere around the world. And that's…

What could be classified as hate speech more than a self videoed murderous rampage? Why the fuck should that be given a platform? Go search the dank corners of the internet for that shit if your "strong heart" desires it. What sick mind desires to give this piece of shit a bigger soap box?

I think if I was one of the people murdered, I would want others to see what kind of terror I went through. A video triggers emotions in people that they don't experience when they just hear about another unfortunate statistic. Maybe that would inspire more people to put effort into preventing these situations.

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#204

Post by XorNot »

mrkstu wrote: post #57
dghughes wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the morning of September 11, 2001 nobody knew there would be a second attack on the other tower. I distinctly remember everyone including myself thinking about the B52 that accidentally ran into the Empire State building. We were all at work so it wasn't like we were watching TV. You're assuming at the time that everyone knew it was a terrorist attack, which is false. Nobody knew that until well after the second p…

No assumptions. We were gathered around the TV in the conference room after the first one hit and part of the conversation was whether it was terrorism, since it was pretty obvious you don't just happen to ram into the side of the tallest building in the country. But your comment is a non-sequitur regardless- even once we all knew it was a terrorist attack it was replayed endlessly on TV for months, including the peo…

There's a pretty big difference between watching an event that killed people, and watching people - individuals - die.

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#205

Post by huffmsa »

peteradio wrote: post #180
huffmsa wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's purged from the parts of internet the majority of people consider "the internet". But here's 65+ people vaporizing from 18 different angles. On YouTube. These are not different. They are footage of a terrorist attack. https://youtu.be/7YLm3pkAiJQ

So are you advocating these be taken down? Or you think that if the rule isn't applied equally everywhere then it shouldn't be applied at all? Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. I think its pretty fucked up to think that shoving this guys murder vid into peoples faces is somehow for the greater good.

I don't see these two pieces of footage as functional different. They are documentation of terrorist attacks. If one is allowed, then yes, all should be.

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#206

Post by fzeroracer »

vuln wrote: post #195
fzeroracer wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're avoiding the point. As he mentioned, 4chan and co are the epitome of no-censorship and entirely free debate. Under the assumptions made in this thread, the free market of ideas should squash ideologues and people who choose to believe in things such as white supremacy or conspiracy theories. Yet this is not the case. Why?

Well in the US Facebook / Twitter / 4chan / 8chan are all protected by safe harbor[1]. These sites / cannot be legally held liable for content their users post. Facebook isn’t required by law to pull down the video. They pull down the video because it’s not profitable (shareholders) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_harbor_(law)

You're going off on wild tangents. I didn't ask about whether or not the sites would be held liable for their content, nor did I muse on whether or not facebook is required by law to pull down their videos. I have a very specific question that I want answers for and I don't want any further misdirection.

4chan is an example of a pure free market of ideas. Yet only the most toxic of ideologies seem to survive. Why is this the case?

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#207

Post by charlesism »

jimjimjim wrote: post #188
charlesism wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That anyone feels the public has some "right" to watch other people die turns my stomach. I didn't grow up on 4chan, or watching far-right propaganda on Youtube, so I still see sadism as a character flaw, not a virtue.

thank you.

At any rate, as far as distribution by private companies goes, that's my view. Before someone jumps on me, I don't think government should outlaw documentation of atrocities, etc.

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#208

Post by huffmsa »

darkpuma wrote: post #89
huffmsa wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still strikes me that it can be illegal to be in possession of a device which has a certain combination of positive and negative polarities embedded in it. Shakespeare's typing monkeys come to mind.

Does it also strike you as strange that it can be illegal to make certain cuts on a piece of metal? (e.g. machine gun manufacture laws that exist on nearly every corner of the planet) I find that these kind of reductive arguments floated for digital subjects fall apart when you remove the computer from the equation.

Yes actually I do think they're ridiculous for physical things too. I take a pretty libertarian lean on most things.

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#209

Post by XorNot »

itchyjunk wrote: post #95
Animats wrote: post #88

The US has shootings this big most years now. Las Vegas festival shooting, 2017, 59 dead. Sutherland Springs church shooting, 2017, 27 dead. Orlando nightclub shooting, 2016, 50 dead. Yes, guns don't kill people, people kill people. But for a high body count, you need a good assault rifle like the AR-15 family, the choice of most mass shooters. Streaming your mass shooting is fully supported by off the shelf products…

I don't follow. Ban certain guns and GoPro? What happens when someone crazy starts stabbing people with hunting knife? Ban knives? Ban live streaming? I don't follow how you turned a shooting in NZ into a `America, Land of Guns` rant.

Because it turns out that where this happened, New Zealand, has much laxer gun laws re: semi-automatic rifles, then where the shooter was from - Australia.

Quite directly, this person went somewhere where it would be easier to acquire the guns he used in the attack.

Unlike America, New Zealand is probably going to implement Australian style laws after this.

Re: Facebook failed to block 20% of uploaded New Zealand shooter videos

#210

Post by roenxi »

Pharmakon wrote: post #147
thepangolino wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve always understood the problem with those videos is that they are sold by producers or distributors and therefore finance those horrible acts.

“Oh but your honor, I wasn’t selling the child pornographry, I was just collecting it!” There’s a reason that isn’t a defense, and I hope you already understand why that is.

You handwave, but:

1) That probably is a valid defense in some countries

2) It is completely reasonable to ask for an articulate link between a crime and some sort of victim, otherwise the crime shouldn't exist. "It is obvious" is only for crimes with a very obvious victim.

For child pornography, I assume the link is because people might be selling it for cash which is harder to trace and collecting it might be supporting a community through, say, ad revenue. Because while it is sick, I don't see how curating a private, personal collection could feasibly cause harm to anyone and hence it seems like a waste of money to prosecute without some sort of connection to how it is profiting CP providers.

I've thought that the countries that criminalise cartoon depictions of child porn have gone too far. It may be obscene, but possession shouldn't be a crime. Literally nobody could be suffering from it.

Post reply on HN