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

YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 281 posts

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#151

Post by pengaru »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #10
fxtentacle wrote: post #8

For me, the really interesting question is not if he's guilty - I had assumed as much - but if he will come out financially successful. That video had millions of views and a sponsorship deal. Call me a cynic, but it seems that some companies will deliberately break the law and pay the price if it's worth it, so why not independent hustlers.

Legal fees alone are going to be many times YouTube revenue. Add lost wages for a half year in prison. Add future lost revenue from sponsors who don't want to be associated with this, and it has to be a huge financial disaster.

No chance for future lucrative film and book deals?

If this kind of thing becomes increasingly common in the "influencer" economy, this instance could be seen as Ground Zero making him an OG pioneer of sorts. That has to be worth something, for better or worse.

Six months prison time isn't very long after all, six months of average salary doesn't buy you anywhere near this level of fame.

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#152

Post by constantly »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #122
mozman wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a big black mark on your reputation, it’s rarely worth it. He could have injured or killed someone for a video. Crime doesn’t pay

> He could have injured or killed someone for a video. I'm pretty sure you are more likely to kill someone driving to work today than crashing a plane in some random as forest.

But you’re more likely to kill someone when the remote forest fire you sparked by intentionally crashing your plane grew and took out a bunch of firefighters and a village than you are to kill someone driving to work.

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#153

Post by rtpg »

ryandrake wrote: post #24
WillPostForFood wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legal fees alone are going to be many times YouTube revenue. Add lost wages for a half year in prison. Add future lost revenue from sponsors who don't want to be associated with this, and it has to be a huge financial disaster.

Even if the legal fees weren't many times the revenue, I never understood why couldn't the justice system default to fines like "All income arising out of crime + $XYZ" for all crimes, so that the fine is never a cost of doing business?

This is a thing (this is the whole thing about treble damages). Despite what people say on HN, "Fines are a cost of doing business" is more a statement of fact (running a business, you sometimes fuck up and pay for it), rather than a statement of intent (do things that get fined but make money off of it). For most people anyways.

If you run scam X and earn Y from that scam, then get caught doing X, it is extremely unlikely that you are walking away with a fine less than Y. The problem is of course maybe the feds only notice Y/2 or Y/10. There's some hand wringing about scam X earning you Y directly but helping to support scam Z in the future that you will do better (or legitimate businesses A,B,C that earn you Y * 1000). But there's a base principle, and "let's just fine off of overall revenue" things leading to "some case officer in Omaha lied on forms, so we will fine this bank $2 billion" is kinda silly[0].

But generally speaking illegal activity where you get caught is going to end badly for you. And illegal activity you get away with will end better for you, but that's true independent of the fee structure.

[0] the case officer might be part of a larger pattern. This is what discovery and investigations are for! Do enough work and you can prove that the earnings from the illegal activity is higher!

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#154

Post by brailsafe »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #139
kuchenbecker wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have statistics on the marginal cost of 5mph? Id be interested to understand your certainty that e.g. 60mph is both more fatal and the number of deaths that could be prevented by going 55mph. I expect there are relatively few deaths that can be directly attributed to 5mph, but given evidence I'll reconsider.

https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/2011PedestrianR... Risk of death for pedestrians goes up 250% when hit by a car going 32mph vs one going 23mph. Given the rising rate of pedestrian deaths in North America (at a 40 year high), it is an almost certainty that 5mph has made the difference in a great number of pedestrian deaths.

This seemed like a carefully chosen representation of the pdf, here's the quote from the linked 2011 estimated risks

> The average adjusted, standardized risk of death reached 10% at an impact speed of 23 mph, 25% at 32 mph, 50% at 42 mph, 75% at 50 mph, and 90% at 58 mph. Risk of death increased approximately linearly with speed for speeds between 32 mph and 50 mph, with an average increase of 2.8 percentage points (95% CI: 2.2 – 3.4) for each 1 mph increase in impact speed for speeds within this range.

Imo, though the risk of death from increased speed does obviously make a difference, particularly at the low end, the difference between 55mph and 60mph is predictably marginal, as in you're still at least 75% likely to die.

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#155

Post by Sebb767 »

COGlory wrote: post #16
bhhaskin wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a law that says you can't intentionally crash a plane? Honest question. There isn't a law that prevents you from intentionally crashing other vehicles. Just around property damage and endangering other people.

Is there a scenario where intentionally crashing a vehicle on property that you do not have permission to crash a vehicle on isn't reckless endangerment/reckless driving? Except maybe steering away from the oncoming bus into the jersey barrier or something?

> Is there a scenario where intentionally crashing a vehicle on property that you do not have permission to crash a vehicle on isn't reckless endangerment/reckless driving?

Arguably whenever you could expect that not crashing the vehicle would lead to a worse outcome. In the plane example, this might be true if you expect to loose control of the plane at some point (due to mechanical failure or force) and a controlled crash is the best option to avoid (possibly) impacting a more populated area. But I agree that this is a rare scenario.

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#156

Post by dghlsakjg »

brailsafe wrote: post #154
dghlsakjg wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/2011PedestrianR... Risk of death for pedestrians goes up 250% when hit by a car going 32mph vs one going 23mph. Given the rising rate of pedestrian deaths in North America (at a 40 year high), it is an almost certainty that 5mph has made the difference in a great number of pedestrian deaths.

This seemed like a carefully chosen representation of the pdf, here's the quote from the linked 2011 estimated risks > The average adjusted, standardized risk of death reached 10% at an impact speed of 23 mph, 25% at 32 mph, 50% at 42 mph, 75% at 50 mph, and 90% at 58 mph. Risk of death increased approximately linearly with speed for speeds between 32 mph and 50 mph, with an average increase of 2.8 percentage points…

True, I did cherry-pick the data, but pedestrian/vehicle interactions are the most likely to occur in areas where the speed limit is lower.

i.e. Most 55mph roads do not have crosswalks at every corner and pedestrians using uncontrolled intersections. Most 25mph roads DO have crosswalks (marked or unmarked) at every corner, and intersections are likely to be uncontrolled for peds. In other words, I am much more worried about getting hit by someone doing 30 in a 25 zone than I am about someone doing 60 in a 55 if only because I rarely walk or cross on roads like that. I suspect that data extrapolates since pedestrian infrastructure tends to be densest in low speed areas.

In any case, the GP was arguing that 5mph was arguably inconsequential. The paper I linked shows that at almost any speed risk of death rises in a meaningful way every 5mph.

To put it all into perspective. Would you rather get hit by a car at 55mph or 60mph? Is the difference marginal if you have to make that choice?

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#157

Post by altairprime »

constantly wrote: post #124
altairprime wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage of viewer income was due to the crime?

I presume this is hypothetical. A reasonable start would be to see the difference average views on a video and views on this particular video times as revenue per view. Admittedly I’ve never heard of this guy and avoid most YouTube “creators” and it got a view out of me out of morbid curiosity and so I could speculate on whether it was pre planned.

That question, as posed, represents why this isn’t often done. It’s very difficult to determine the contributing revenue fraction when one illegal action is laundered among many. Seizure tends to be all or nothing as a result.

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#158

Post by lovecg »

civilitty wrote: post #143
lovecg wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: this is wrong as pointed out below. FAA doesn’t mess around with the maintenance regulations. If I remember correctly the A&P knowledge test requirement was to answer 99% of questions correctly, compared to something like 75% for a PPL (I might be way off but there was a large difference).

You're way off. Comically so. A&P passing grade is more like 70%. It's not a comparable figure to PPL ground school.

You’re right, but I’m wondering where my confusion comes from. I’m absolutely positive something required a much higher %. Maybe a different license or regs changed in the last decade or so?

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#159

Post by anatnom »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #46
mattmaroon wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably including Watergate which I believe was the inspiration for that quote. The underlying act was probably survivable. The coverup was not.

It’s worth mentioning that the Watergate coverup eventually failed because of a plane crash and the events set in motion due to it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Air_Lines_Flight_553

Woodward and Bernstein were already investigating (for many months prior to the crash), and Nixon's later coverups (after March 1973) don't seem to be connected to the crash in any way.

Perhaps if the crash hadn't happened, the people/money on board could have ensured McCord (and the other plumbers) would have stayed quiet instead of telling Judge Sirica that it was a White House operation. Without some significant evidence of intent for the passengers, though, this is a pretty soft argument.

Re: YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in prison for obstructing probe into plane crash

#160

Post by financltravsty »

duskwuff wrote: post #105
financltravsty wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Todd Hutchinson (bread, candy, and a radio -- U.S.A), Elkeno Wallace (hot dog buns -- Bahamas), Jean Valjean (self-evident), numerous gulag victims (see: Solzhenitsyn), unnamed father who got his hand and foot chopped off for stealing a bag of flour in Syria, etc.

> Jean Valjean (self-evident) Jean Valjean is a character in a novel, not a real person, and is about as relevant to this discussion as a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk.

Apparently not self-evident!

A.k.a Eugène Vidocq

Post reply on HN