431–440 of 491 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do they need to be “people” to be a victim? Even if you want to insist that YouTube can not possibly be a victim, it’s still horrible to jump on a multiple attempted homicide to criticize policies about videos posted on a web site.
If you get in a car accident, no one counts your car as a victim. This is the same thing.
If you steal from a corporate-owned store, is that a victimless crime?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People doing things that you consider irrational is not automatically "mental illness." To conflate the two is both to absolve criminals and terrorists of moral responsibility and to stigmatize the mentally ill, most of whom are not homicidal. Unless you have specific evidence of a particular mental illness, this kind of statement is irresponsible.
I'm not sure the relativism is called for here, given the specific context of this case.
Regardless of what is ultimately found out about the case, people were claiming mental illness before they had information to support that, as they do in nearly all of these cases.
If you search her name on twitter, around 40% of what you see is right wing conspiracy theorists who assert, without evidence, that she was a member of ISIS. I also noticed a smaller percentage of people asserting, again without evidence, that she was an NRA member. And neither appear to be true. How do these get spread on Twitter? Are partisans mindlessly voting them up? Are bots behind this? Man, do I feel stupid f…
> Man, do I feel stupid for thinking the internet would be a force for good. That it would promote democracy, free speech, and critical thinking. The internet is a tool and like any tool, it can be used for both good and evil. It depends on the people using it. In fact, the internet is arguably a victim of it's own success. It has democratized thought so well such that people whose ideas are morally depraved have the…
No. We only heard about her ideas when she murdered people. No-one on HN had heard anything from her before then. The internet did nothing to promote or supress her ideas, other than the news coverage she got after killing people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think mental illness is automatically implied when you go on a shooting spree for a video sharing site's monetization policies.
I don't remember reading that in the DSM. You perpetuate this problem when you trivialize their concerns in this way.
e.g.: Homosexuality was removed from that book, and inattentive children are still in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure the relativism is called for here, given the specific context of this case.
A position doesn't become "relativism" just because you don't want to hear it. It's not relativism to point out that people have responsibility for their actions, nor to point out that mental illnesses do not generally make people homicidal. Regardless of what is ultimately found out about the case, people were claiming mental illness before they had information to support that, as they do in nearly all of these case…
A shooting spree in reaction to an website's policy change is both immoral and irrational. No conceivable context would make that chain of actions acceptable.
How could one look at this action and assume mental illness does not exist?
It's not relativism to point out that people have responsibility for their actions, nor to point out that mental illnesses do not generally make people homicidal.
Saying mental illness exists based on their behavior is not even close to the same thing as saying that they did not have culpability for their actions, and it's both unfair and disingenuous to imply I did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are a bunch of these in society that are interesting and very deserving of more public discussion, including that one (broadly communication access). Given the importance to work and life of having access to the wireless networks today, owned by AT&T, Verizon etc., should they be allowed to blanket deny you access to them as a customer (assuming you can pay)? Especially given the wireless carriers are essential…
1 out of every 40 Americans are convicted felons? Edit: 1 out of 40 Americans are disenfranchised due to being a convicted felon?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_disenfranchisement#Curr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't have to be "frothing at the mouth" to be mentally unstable. I saw her videos on Dailymotion and I had the impression that something is not right with her, can't really pinpoint or explain what it is. but definitely very awkward in front of the camera. Just my personal take on it.
I watched one video. It's possible that something was "not right with her" but then I think that's true in some small way with almost all of us (personality foibles, etc). But it's also possible she was on-edge because she was angry and frustrated by a situation that was important to her (earnings, passions, etc). Lots of people act like that when they feel upset, then you add in the pressure of a camera...
Ofcourse this doesn't excuse what she did.
So looking at her videos on Telegram ( https://t.me/nasimesabz1 ), she was anti gun. She was a very weird individual with clear mental health issues. I don't even know what to make of most of her content on that channel.
Can you expand on that? Did she make irrational comments, accuse people of impossible acts, was she threatening? I looked at the 1.5 minute video someone copied out and she was upset but not frothing at the mouth.
Her entire personality was based on being vegan.
She considered herself to be someone from an alien planet sent to earth to suffer.
She criticized all the suffering around her and explained how nobody could understand her.
She was apparently against anal sex.
She hated women who used their body to get places. While she herself did do that (explicitly said so) in her videos.
She thought there is a conspiracy against her "truth".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you get in a car accident, no one counts your car as a victim. This is the same thing.
Unlike cars, corporations are at least made of people. If you steal from a corporate-owned store, is that a victimless crime?
A corporation is owned by people. It is not "made of" people like some grotesque colossus.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wasn't complaining about labeling. I was complaining because assertions that she was an NRA or ISIS supporter were false. I believe my assertions were true. Here are the first two people I saw on my twitter search: Jack Posobiec Wikipedia: "John Michael "Jack" Posobiec III (/pəˈsoʊbɪk/ pə-SOW-bik; born 1985) is an American alt-right[1][2][3] internet troll, conspiracy theorist,[4][5] and self-described journalist,…
I followed this story last night into a live youtube stream where the presenter asserted everything with an authoritative voice: After bumbling his way through some half-hearted doxing attempts and watching her videos, he was smugly confident in his extrapolations of her psychological diagnosis, political affiliations, family history, &c. And his commenters formed a sycophantic chorus. Ideology is the failure of a me…