Live data from Hacker News

YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

twitter.com

251–260 of 645 posts

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#251
post #132
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"unbiased content"

I'd like to think a court would be the definition of unbiased.

Judges, yes. Jurys? Not always.

They can be directly or indirectly intimidated if the trial is high profile enough and if their identities are leaked.

With Chauvin's trial, the jury was indirectly intimidated by the public demands for a guilty verdict from politicians like Maxine Waters and other public figures.

In the Rittenhouse trial the judge caught someone in the courtroom surreptitiously filming the jury presumably to leak their identities. It's definitely possible to get a biased court.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#252
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * This implies that Grosskreutz re-racked his gun at some point--something he claims is a threat to kill. It doesn't imply that. It would be nice if, in a thread about the media misreporting the facts of the case and feeding the biases of the folks who are supposed to be benefiting from the coverage, we wouldn't make other assumptions. You might think it's reasonable to make this assumption, but (a) the people leap…

I'm basing my opinions on those statements made in open court that were subjected to cross-examination, not random social media nonsense, which is pretty much all there was a year ago when you formed this opinion. The police said the unspent round did not match Kyle's weapon. It does match the ammo in the Glock. If you have video evidence of another Glock (EDIT: or any other gun using the same ammo) being racked at t…

I haven't been watching the trial so forgive me this question, but what does it mean for the found round to match the ammunition in the glock? That they were both 9mm? Or that they were both the same brand and variety of 9mm?

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#253
post #184
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing they need from viewers is eyeballs. Truth and facts don’t get you eyeballs, outrage and propaganda do. It is insanely hard to present only facts and be truthful and impartial. It is quite easy to pick a narrative and stick to it, damn the facts. MSM is funded by advertisers and big corporations. They’ll do what their money masters want them to - vilifying unions is a good example.

I’m surprised how blantant the narrative pushing is orchestrated. This example happened the other day on NBC news(main channel). So regardless of your stance on ivermectin, this is what played the other day: Aaron Roger’s used ivermectin at the advise of Joe Rogan. Ivermectin is oftentimes used a horse dewormer. Return from Pfizer commercial. Pfizer has announced a new Covid antiviral drug that combines mRNA therapy…

Ivermectin has long fallen out of patent protection and generics can be manufactured. Anyone is free to make it and apply to the FDA for authorization to use it as Covid treatment - just bring the data. Obviously, that hasn't happened. No one has made an attempt.

But you are here to disparage a company that has developed a novel antiviral treatment and has applied for the authorization.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#254

I think at this point we can just expect this stuff. The ridiculousness of it, though. The rekieta law stream (which is fantastic , btw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7YXd2M5E-8 ) has anywhere from 4-12 active lawyers giving commentary and context to everything that is happening. This is exactly the type of thing we dreamed about when we were first creating the internet. However: often times these smaller independ…

Honestly I'm surprised how closely the scenes here match typical movie trials, though I understand that it's unusual for the jury to be removed from the courtroom during closing arguments because the state's attorney makes a mistake. And then get removed again literally 10 seconds later because the state's attorney does the same thing again.

What were the mistakes?

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why decentralization is so important. Peertube, IPFS, cryptocurrency, bittorrent, etc. and really web3 in general are trying to move us in that direction. Part of the problem is that people have been told that there is such a thing as a free lunch. Yet YouTube censorship is a great example of where that leads us.

In this context, web3 looks more attractive. Too bad its formative moments are being steered by scammers selling jpegs of stick figure drawings.

Honestly, so what? Is email a scam because it has damaged peoples lives?

This kind of logic is how we ended up here in the first place.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#257
post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I tuned in out of curiosity. I'm assuming these guys are biased in favor of the defense? They were just laughing at the fact that Rosenbaum is dead. Or do they just have a dark sense of humor or something?

I have followed them for the last couple of weeks, and there is a good reason for that. The prosecution has beyond ridiculous arguments time and again over the last 2 weeks. The lawyers all started out really civil, and some of the violations (especially the 5th amendment one that even got the Judge angry) began to make then exasperated. Combine that with the general silence of the defense, and by now they are all pr…

Why does everything have to be a coping mechanism. Why can't they just be desensitized because they deal with it so much?

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#258
post #67
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> these smaller independent journalists and commenters go against the reality that media companies want you to believe you live in. For an example from this specific case, compare the actual unedited testimony of Gaige Grosskreutz, who admitted on the stand that Rittenhouse did not fire until Gaige's Glock 17 was pointed directly at Kyle's head , to the coverage of his testimony by CNN, et. al. The mainstream media l…

Yes its like they are shaping reality and attempting to cause social unrest. What the ultimate aim of such a narrative is I am unsure? Just keep people divided? Get more viewers who are "outraged"? Dystopic

Yeah, it's easy to drop an innuendo laiden “long” headline and then the readers won't read what actually happened in the text of the article and sway public opinion a lot.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#259

It's hilarious how some people are always saying everything is some conspiracy. You work at any of these companies (YouTube, Twitter, Meta, Snap) and the amount of internal outages is so frequent your eyes glaze over. Not to say that the outages necessarily affect users, but so much so that I just assume all of this stuff is just the result of automation gone wrong. The bar for conspiracy I think needs to be pretty h…

The closed nature of these companies feeds into this sort of thing, though. A frequent complaint of channel owners is that they aren't told why they've received strikes against their channels. Google also makes it incredibly difficult to submit feedback about their platforms. And any time something questionable or unfavorable arises, they just claim that it's the mysterious will of their overly-complicated algorithms that simply cannot be explained, despite being deliberately engineered by their teams of developers.

On top of that, there have been clear examples of censorship. For example, when Google specifically targeted Christian websites in a blacklist on Google Now [1], or when they were noted for scrubbing autocomplete results that were critical of Hillary Clinton around the 2016 election [2] when it was also revealed that then-Alphabet chairman Eric Schmidt had been a major supporter of Clinton for years [3]. These things seldom get questioned, and even then rarely get answers. It's hardly surprising to see why many people don't trust these companies and jump to conspiracy theories when these things happen.

[1] https://www.christiantoday.com/article/google-is-blacklistin...

[2] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3636048/Google-accu...

[3] https://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-emails-google-eric...

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#260
post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it illegal for 17 year olds to carry assault rifles and point them at others (prior to the incident where life wasn't threatened) as admitted in court. > To be clear, the death of such a person, especially if it is while they are in the process of trying to assault and/or kill someone (which the evidence clearly shows) is in fact something to be celebrated. The world is a better place for his absence from it. I…

> Isn't it illegal for 17 year olds to carry assault rifles and point them at others (prior to the incident where life wasn't threatened) as admitted in court. That charge was dropped because Kyle was not carrying a short-barreled rifle. However, ADA Binger did take Kyle's rifle, pointed it at the jury without checking it (saying his assistant had), and had his finger on the trigger while doing so. Thankfully he didn…

All I can say is what a fucking idiot if I was on the jury I would have lost my shit on him. Even if you clear a gun I still pretend a magic bullet fell from the sky and some how chambered itself. Never point a gun a someone unless you are defending yourself or plan to shoot them. That is how hundreds of people had died. I can believe it that is so crazy. Obviously he was trying to provoke an emotional response by pointing a gun at them. This clearly tells me they evidence is not on his side he needs tactics to provoke the jury.
Post reply on HN