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'

#291

Post by kita99 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:52 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #206

timkpaine wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without addressing any of the actual arguments.. >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. This echos the classic dropbox comment, "you can just do it yourself". A layperson isn't going to. >That capricious decision can be appealed, you can take Youtube to court if you feel…

> This echos the classic dropbox comment, "you can just do it yourself". A layperson isn't going to. Then you will have to live with being dependent on the whims of another entity. Which means you give up a lot of your freedoms. > As the facebook controversies have show, people have a remarkably bad time using common sense and making rational decisions on the internet This wasn't 'on the internet', this was about as…

In a society you can’t live without depending on another entity, person or corporation.

We don’t have time for everything, at some point we have to outsorce work.

Did you write the OS used to start up your browser/app to type this comment?

Just because we agreed to depend on others doesn’t mean they can shit on us.

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

#292

Post by mschuster91 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:53 PM UTC

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #290

sh4z wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His point is if the person could have reached some kind of support they might never have ended up in such a desperate situation. When I get really mistreated / fooled and can't reach any kind of human support and none of the "robotic" support options work - it's incredibly frustrating. Not to the point where I'd shoot someone, but I've definitely smashed my fist on a table once or twice.

I have been once in such point of frustration when I had not received prize for what I won in the competition and the person whom I was in contact with did not said that they can't pay me but just ignored my mail. And it was not even a huge amount, but it could be used for a semester in college. Edit: I was emphasizing that I became irrationally frustrated, not that I didn't kill someone.

> Though I was not close to pick a gun.

You maybe not, but less mentally stable persons or those without any safety net? The US isn't known for good mental health care and also not for a safety net. Not everyone lives a privileged life.

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

#293

Post by Applejinx » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:53 PM UTC

thefounder wrote: post #116

deftnerd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While they're not directly responsible, the problem was entirely of their making. They created a whole new profession (even my 8-year-old son wants to grow up to be a "professional youtubber") and then arbitrarily destroy careers. The created an environment where people could work hard to create their own destiny while giving themselves the ability to destroy those destinies without cause or recourse. It was only a m…

People ahould not put too much trust in youtube-like companies. If you have a youtube career you don't really have a real career/job. You just found a way to make easy bucks. Youtube is not the "internet" of videos. You can have your own website

Completely fails to understand network effects and the history of internet business (indeed, big box stores preceding internet business).

Please do not suggest 'you can make your own website' is an answer to issues around the management of massive, subsidized content-aggregation platforms. A thing like YouTube cuts off the air supply of competitors, especially when it's run at a loss, and individual web hosts are not remotely comparable.

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

#294

Post by pg_bot » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:53 PM UTC

_bxg1 wrote: post #136

No sane person would argue that what she did was okay. With that disclaimer, I can't help but feel sorry for her. In the unregulated gig/"creator" economy, someone's entire career - not just their livelihood but their life's work - can be wiped out in an instant. In her case it doesn't even sound like it was intentional. An algorithmic blip. That kind of hopeless, pointless loss would make anybody's mental health tak…

Explain what you mean by your last sentence.

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

#295

Post by mschuster91 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:54 PM UTC

GVIrish wrote: post #265

mschuster91 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at some decision that could inconvenience them? Losing one's job is not just an "inconvenience". It is an inconvenience in a country with a social safety net. In a country like the US where job loss often enough means direct loss of health insurance and a place to live, losing a job can (and will) lead to homelessness and eventual death.

Where does it say that Youtube was the sole source of this woman's income? But let's say it was. People lose their jobs all the time and don't result to violence. It makes zero sense to assign blame to Youtube for the shooting even if them de-monetizing her took away her only source of income.

> People lose their jobs all the time and don't result to violence.

Oh, enough do. There's a reason why fired people get escorted by security.

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

#296

Post by rectang » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:54 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #188

emodendroket wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to see what the reaction here would look like if instead AWS we dropping a bunch of customers with no warning.

Hopefully it would simply mean more customers for other hosting centers. If you feel that people should take up arms against AWS employees in that case then you have other problems. Business disputes are as old as businesses and we have ways to resolve those disputes: the courts. And be sure to read the fine print of any service or company that you are going to do business with if your business will be dependent on t…

The courts are for rich people. Suing a major corporation is all but hopeless.

Practically, when you have a business dispute with a major corporation, your only option is to give up.

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

#297

Post by spraak » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:56 PM UTC

stareatgoats wrote: post #194

spraak wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you just extrapolating assumptions here? Because you're saying a lot that hasn't been said. E.g. > An example of how some people are so triggered by advocacy groups (in this case PETA) that it just takes a slight economic misfortune to bring out the guns? They said she was a vegan activist [1], not part of PETA. > An example of how when the shooter is a woman she is not really demonized the way guys are (even whe…

Yes, those are just assumptions more or less, although I'm guessing all those points could be valid aspects of the narrative. Primarily it's just annoying that a complex situation is condensed down to "it's because her videos were 'de-monetized'". It seems you take offense with me singling out the PETA connection however. But it was just an example of how certain advocacy groups are not afraid to stir up hate, PETA i…

OK, I understand you more now, and I agree it seems more complex than just being angry about de-monetization. However I don't think it's specifically helpful to imaginatively enumerate what the other underlying reasons are. And finally no, I don't care about PETA. I am personally a vegan and get annoyed when all vegans are seen as one, crazy group, but no, I have no connection to PETA.

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

#298

Post by fixermark » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:56 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #229

jacquesm wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully it would simply mean more customers for other hosting centers. If you feel that people should take up arms against AWS employees in that case then you have other problems. Business disputes are as old as businesses and we have ways to resolve those disputes: the courts. And be sure to read the fine print of any service or company that you are going to do business with if your business will be dependent on t…

Migrating off of AWS is a difficult, drawn-out process which can take months, if you've got a lot of stuff there or are using a lot of AWS-specific features. That's part of why I chose that example. A lot of businesses a lot of people here work for would be in quite difficult straits if that happened.

... but the fact remains: AWS is a service provided by a private corporation, not the government. There's no requirement or mandate in criminal law that it exist or continue to function. It could be dropped without warning at any time, and the only recourse customers would have is whatever contracts provide for them. This isn't something Amazon would do, because "Leaving millions of dollars of revenue on the table" isn't in their best interest. But if it ever becomes in their best interest? Nothing but civil contracts stopping them.

Most of society actually works like this, and we somehow manage to muddle through without shooting each other most of the time.

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

#299

Post by _dps » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:56 PM UTC

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…

"Demonetized" is exactly the term used both by Youtube creators and by Youtube representatives for this phenomenon for as long as it has been around.

Youtube first made the pitch that you could "monetize" your videos. Then they had to deny that offer to certain cases. This naturally led to "demonetized" (as opposed to some awkward phrase like "ineligible for monetization").

The word is reasonable in context, and the usage ship has sailed — all market participants use it. I think it's a big stretch to see any presumption of a right in the use of this word.

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

#300

Post by mschuster91 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:56 PM UTC

tedunangst wrote: post #283

mschuster91 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean a support team that has actual freedoms to help the customer and is not forced to operate on a script that has only one option to tell the customer: You're screwed. Or, even better: as here the case seems to be that the shooter depended on Youtube as income, why shouldn't she have the right to have her effective "firing" appealed in a proper court of law, like in Germany?

How does the law work in Germany? If youtube pulls ads from a German's videos, they can demand to get paid anyway?

Not if you're working on your own (though there may be a slim chance of getting damages replacements if the decision is proven to be malignant, but that's difficult as hell to do). If you are an employed creator, on the other hand, yes your employer has to pay you even if Youtube shuts down the monetization.

Exactly this safety net is what the "gig economy" tries to cut...