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'

#271

Post by baud147258 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:45 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #171

yoz-y wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big problem with automatic demonetization is that what frequently happens is that (let's assume that you are a popular Youtuber): You spend a lot of time and money to make a video. You upload it to youtube. It trips some random check and is flagged and de-monetized, you appeal. People come and watch your video, with this type of content the vast majority of views is in the few first days since publishing. Your appe…

Business disputes are not normally resolved with weapons. If you treat your Youtube presence as a business you are doing it wrong to begin with, and your conflict resolution venue will be the courts, not shooting at random employees.

> If you treat your Youtube presence as a business you are doing it wrong to begin with

Why? If you are aware of the risks, have alternate monetization scheme, back-ups and mirrors of your videos, what's the problem of relying on a company who can distribute videos way better than what one person can do?

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

#272

Post by saiya-jin » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:45 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #165

emodendroket wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to defend shooting anyone, obviously. But YouTube has captured the entire market, practically, for streaming video, and encouraged people to look at it as a way of making money (even a full-time time job, for many). Why would you be surprised that someone would be upset about a capricious decision, which cannot be appealed, suddenly taking away the money?

> I'm not going to defend shooting anyone, obviously. And then you proceed to defend that anyway. Any webserver will be happy to serve up .mp4 content. There are free players (JWPlayer for instance) and you are entirely free to serve up whatever you want from your own hosted service. That capricious decision can be appealed, you can take Youtube to court if you feel they have wronged you. > Why would you be surprised…

you sir have some serious issues to solve. good luck with that. your content is not even worth commenting on

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

#273

Post by emodendroket » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:45 PM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #246

emodendroket wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mark Ames wrote a whole book (which I admit I didn't quite finish) with the thesis that you could tie the rise of workplace shootings to an increase in worker precarity.

> you could tie the rise of workplace shootings to an increase in worker precarity. Funny, outside of the US even in countries with high unemployment nobody goes around and shoots anyone.

Which countries do you have in mind here? Is it not the case that most of them have either less access to guns or better social programs for the unemployed (or both)?

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

#274

Post by bsenftner » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:45 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #159

bsenftner wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The Internet was supposed to be about the free exchange of information." Actually, no, not at all. The Internet was for defense contractors to share information, and when made available to the public it was for corporations to sell services to the public. All that "free information" propaganda was just propaganda to get the public comfortable with allowing large scale surveillance technologies into their homes and t…

My first access to the internet was through MichNet ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merit_Network ) which was motivated by connecting individuals to the various academic resources available on the internet. It preceded the commercialization of the internet.

I was on ARPNET back in the 70's, when the only conversations were c programming and absurd humor.

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

#275

Post by chii » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:45 PM UTC

yoz-y wrote: post #161

jacquesm wrote: post #82

'De-Monetized' suggests that someone who produces a video has an automatic right to income. That's bonkers, it's already quite a service that Youtube allows you to upload your videos to reach an audience that you'd be hard pressed to serve from your own server. They do this for free. In the previous iteration of such platforms all the ad income would go to the owner of the website, not to the rights owners of the vid…

A big problem with automatic demonetization is that what frequently happens is that (let's assume that you are a popular Youtuber): You spend a lot of time and money to make a video. You upload it to youtube. It trips some random check and is flagged and de-monetized, you appeal. People come and watch your video, with this type of content the vast majority of views is in the few first days since publishing. Your appe…

> It trips some random check and is flagged and de-monetized

this is the problem i think a lot of youtubers have. If only youtube can clearly say what they are checking or set guidelines for monetizations to follow. Of course, the issue they must have is that guidelines are often skirted around - youtubers (and internet in general) is known for attempting to edge towards the limits...

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

#276

Post by jmull » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:46 PM UTC

nullifidian wrote: post #121

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…

I'm not an American. The fact that a targeted online advertisement shown before the video is associated with the video and not with the platform, and requires damage control is perplexing and unexplainable to me... "There is no direct relationship between the video and the ad - It's matched by the machinery to the viewer, not to the video." should be the official answer and the end of the story. Is an ad exposure bef…

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. Being associated with controversial content offends people, which drives away what could otherwise be good paying customers. So they just want to avoid it.

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

#277

Post by emodendroket » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:46 PM UTC

13of40 wrote: post #254

ensignro2340 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would suck for many people, but would totally be in their right. Again - how are people confused about this. If AWS drops you as a customer use an alternative. Moreover, these people's videos are still hosted on YouTube's servers.

One distinction is that AWS has major competitors you could switch to, but YouTube essentially has a monopoly on that kind of content distribution.

Another is that AWS customers tend to be businesses with full-time workers and not one person trying to eke out a living.

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

#278

Post by gowld » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:46 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #85

patcheudor wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. It's common to support animal rights while despising humans. This is especially true amongst those who subscribe to the more fringe animal activism groups that as an example free animals used for medical or cosmetic testing from their 'evil human captors'.

They'll be shocked when they realize we too are animals.

Jacques, you are smarter than that.

WWII Allies killed Nazis to save humans. They weren't shocked to realize that Nazis were humans.

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

#279

Post by patientplatypus » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:46 PM UTC

Well...

My opinion is going to be unpopular, but...frankly I empathize with the woman. YouTube controls the entire streaming market and there are no legal controls in place to treat their streamers like employees - they're contractors so YouTube can skirt employment laws. Same way Silicon Valley has been making money for years with things like Task Rabbit and Uber - they're not being innovative they're breaking the social contract for profit.

And what's the alternative here, other than violence? SV has successfully shown that they can make products that find loopholes in laws faster than laws can be made, and frankly, our political system is broken. I'm not saying the woman was rational in what she did...probably she was acting out of sadness and despair. However, it's not like there exists a rational way of fixing the kinds of problems she has. Like, what is she going to do, sue for lost income? Appeal to the labor relations board? This is what happens when we don't look out for the despairing - they shoot up schools and workplaces.

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

#280

Post by mrtksn » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:46 PM UTC

post_break wrote: post #203

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…

If it wasn't a gun it could have been a knife. Or like the epidemic over seas, a bunch of acid thrown on peoples faces. We don't know how she got the gun, but in America, if you have no criminal background, haven't done anything crazy, and they do a background check, you can purchase a weapon. You can't ban crazy, and until we have some way of seeing into the future, you can't stop all crimes. Also, our gun ownership…

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 down in tears...

I'm not anti-gun, in fact when I was a kid I loved shooting with airguns and I bet it's a great hobby to shoot real guns but the European approach seems to be working.

Anyway, can you prove that my perception is wrong and in reality, people use knives and acid when guns are not readily available?