Shooting at YouTube HQ

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, SCRawl, Thanas, Edi, K. A. Pital

Titan Uranus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 203
Joined: 2013-05-02 01:12am

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by Titan Uranus » 2018-04-05 11:41am

Rogue 9 wrote:
2018-04-04 11:44pm
It's surprising what the bots will flag, though. As an example, I've gotten copyright flags for original performances of songs well over a hundred years old (well into the public domain) that I've successfully fought. Fortunately, that was before they instituted the rule that they won't review automated flags unless the video gets a thousand views in the span of seven days, which is keeping me from disputing the flagging of videos of a parchment making workshop I filmed as unsuitable for advertisers due to violence (which is a moot point now that my entire channel is demonetized anyway).
True, but on the other hand, she added such heavy effects to the songs she parodied that I'm not sure that they actually resemble the original songs. But the bots are nothing if not overzealous.
Mr Bean wrote:
2018-04-05 07:19am
*snip bit about popularity*
Yeah, even if the videos were all ~1 minute long on average, she should have easily cleared the 5K hour threshold. It's strange for such a small personality to have so many views and four different channels, though. Or for a channel with that many views to have so few subscribers. Maybe one of her vids was a minor viral hit?
*snip bit about content*
Having watched the mirrors, they aren't really workout videos. They're some sort of dance/psychedelic/art project weirdness. They might be labeled as exercise videos, but they don't appear to have been such a thing.

User avatar
Zixinus
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6474
Joined: 2007-06-19 12:48pm
Location: In Seth the Blitzspear
Contact:

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by Zixinus » 2018-04-06 01:48pm

I would like to note that I find it interesting that a mass shooting where the shooter's motivations are clear, the inevitable discussion about gun control does not seem to follow.
Credo!
Chat with me on Skype if you want to talk about writing, ideas or if you want a test-reader! PM for address.

User avatar
Lonestar
Keeper of the Schwartz
Posts: 13142
Joined: 2003-02-13 03:21pm
Location: Tysons Corner Microwave Tower
Contact:

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by Lonestar » 2018-04-06 02:09pm

U.P. Cinnabar wrote:
2018-04-04 01:32pm
Except the narrative will blame the liberalism, and not YT.

Still another way the right and their NRA are going to make book on this.
The Gunosphere mostly has been blaming YT, because, well, YT has been fuckin' gun channels a lot lately.

BTW, when the shooting was breaking Twitter was talking about how it was going to be a white NRA male and a least a few people locked/made their accounts private when it wasn't their particular object of hate.

Somehow, given that you have twice in a row made hay out of the NRA, I suspect you were one of those with a semi in anticipation of it being a white male.
"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

User avatar
U.P. Cinnabar
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2373
Joined: 2016-02-05 08:11pm
Location: Aboard the RCS Princess Cecile

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by U.P. Cinnabar » 2018-04-06 02:22pm

The NRA deserves to be made hay out of, and given its support for domestic terrorists in the past, neither it or its apologists have any legs to stand on, when playing victim. So fuck you and your preconceptions with a rusty razor.
"Beware the Beast, Man, for he is the Devil's pawn. Alone amongst God's primates, he kills for sport, for lust, for greed. Yea, he will murder his brother to possess his brother's land. Let him not breed in great numbers, for he will make a desert of his home and yours. Shun him, drive him back into his jungle lair, for he is the harbinger of Death.."
—29th Scroll, 6th Verse of Ape Law

"The Constitution's a piece of paper. A kick in the head is a jolt."
—Stanley "Ray" Kowalski
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
---NRA motto

User avatar
Wild Zontargs
Padawan Learner
Posts: 318
Joined: 2010-07-06 01:24pm

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by Wild Zontargs » 2018-04-06 07:38pm

Zixinus wrote:
2018-04-06 01:48pm
I would like to note that I find it interesting that a mass shooting where the shooter's motivations are clear, the inevitable discussion about gun control does not seem to follow.
The shooter apparently complied with all local regulations, which are some of the strongest in the country. This gives the pro-control side little reason to politicize the shooting. The pro-gun side is all over their own forums saying "see? SEE?!" but nobody else cares.

[devil's advocate]

More cynically, this shooting is a counter-argument against the current gun control push: high capacity, high power, scary looking guns are supposed to be the problem (this was apparently a fully legal handgun with a small magazine, which the moderates on the pro-control side are saying would be just fine), and the shooter wasn't of an outgroup demographic (woman, vegan, immigrant, etc) so they can't use this as an example on those terms. Any attempt to tie this into the gun control push wouldn't do anything other than damage the non "ban all guns" arguments. The only route you could take would be "mental health", but with no apparent diagnosis, you'd have to go by her online presence. The political content of her videos and website make this troublesome, as it'd be a free excuse for the other side to say "see, the anti-gun side even agrees that this is what crazy looks like. Now look at the anti-gun protesters. Notice anything in common?" The remaining alternative is to go straight to "ban all guns", and that's still political suicide.

[/devil's advocate]
"Ugh. I hate agreeing with Zontargs."
"What you are is abject human trash who is very good at dodging actual rule violations while still being human trash."
-- Alyrium Denryle
iustitia socialis delenda est

Titan Uranus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 203
Joined: 2013-05-02 01:12am

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by Titan Uranus » 2018-04-06 08:50pm

U.P. Cinnabar wrote:
2018-04-06 02:22pm
The NRA deserves to be made hay out of, and given its support for domestic terrorists in the past, neither it or its apologists have any legs to stand on, when playing victim. So fuck you and your preconceptions with a rusty razor.
Which specific domestic terrorists? Or is this in the general sense of "anyone who supports gun rights is a domestic terrorist?"

User avatar
Ziggy Stardust
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2736
Joined: 2006-09-10 10:16pm
Location: Research Triangle, NC

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by Ziggy Stardust » 2018-04-09 12:45pm

Wild Zontargs wrote:
2018-04-06 07:38pm
Zixinus wrote:
2018-04-06 01:48pm
I would like to note that I find it interesting that a mass shooting where the shooter's motivations are clear, the inevitable discussion about gun control does not seem to follow.
The shooter apparently complied with all local regulations, which are some of the strongest in the country. This gives the pro-control side little reason to politicize the shooting. The pro-gun side is all over their own forums saying "see? SEE?!" but nobody else cares.

[devil's advocate]

More cynically, this shooting is a counter-argument against the current gun control push: high capacity, high power, scary looking guns are supposed to be the problem (this was apparently a fully legal handgun with a small magazine, which the moderates on the pro-control side are saying would be just fine), and the shooter wasn't of an outgroup demographic (woman, vegan, immigrant, etc) so they can't use this as an example on those terms. Any attempt to tie this into the gun control push wouldn't do anything other than damage the non "ban all guns" arguments. The only route you could take would be "mental health", but with no apparent diagnosis, you'd have to go by her online presence. The political content of her videos and website make this troublesome, as it'd be a free excuse for the other side to say "see, the anti-gun side even agrees that this is what crazy looks like. Now look at the anti-gun protesters. Notice anything in common?" The remaining alternative is to go straight to "ban all guns", and that's still political suicide.

[/devil's advocate]
See, this exact situation could also be spun the opposite way. One of the common arguments by the "pro-gun" side is that gun control won't stop crime because responsible gun owners with registered weapons don't go out and shoot people, that most gun crime is being done with guns that were obtained illegally anyway. This strengthens the "ban all guns" argument (in the minds of those who support those arguments, of which I am not one, by the way, this is merely didactic) since it is evidence that any gun and any gun-owner can commit a crime and so we should get rid of all guns instead of letting anyone own them even under what currently passes for strict gun control laws (remember, under this argument, all current gun control legislation is currently inadequate, even in states that are relatively strict like California, because they don't want any guns around at all). As always, gun control is a complex issue, and it is really easy to spin any given shooting like this in support of either position.

User avatar
TheFeniX
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4473
Joined: 2003-06-26 04:24pm
Location: Texas

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by TheFeniX » 2018-04-09 01:18pm

Like how Bojack Horseman handled women with guns? Hehe.

That would be a tough sell. We already have instances of "real american" gun owners (Read: white male) getting drunk, mad, etc and shooting someone (usually their wives) in the heat of the moment. It happens way more than it should, but it's still a minuscule percentage of legal gun owners. In the case of "non-white liberal vegan woman commits mass murder with firearm at a billion dollar tech firm in Commifornia!" that's a way to juicy a niche to latch onto and lose the narrative you're thinking of.

If anything, a few far-right (even medium-rare right) groups have already latched onto the idea that "Tech CEOs only seem to care about gun control now that their Ferrari's might risk getting shot up" and shit like "isn't liberal minority women the group they would WANT to have guns?"

And to be fair, most Tech giants took a solid neutral stance on guns for years, while taking hard stances on many other important topics. So it does smack of "we care now that it's affecting, or could affect, us" for them to get involved at this particular moment. I'm not saying they don't have every right to, but we both know how much more important appearances are than facts in these types of situations.

User avatar
Lonestar
Keeper of the Schwartz
Posts: 13142
Joined: 2003-02-13 03:21pm
Location: Tysons Corner Microwave Tower
Contact:

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by Lonestar » 2018-04-10 05:06pm

U.P. Cinnabar wrote:
2018-04-06 02:22pm
The NRA deserves to be made hay out of, and given its support for domestic terrorists in the past,
Name 5
neither it or its apologists have any legs to stand on, when playing victim. So fuck you and your preconceptions with a rusty razor.

Is this your way of saying your get your information about gun culture from the Occupy Democrats FB page?
"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

Titan Uranus
Padawan Learner
Posts: 203
Joined: 2013-05-02 01:12am

Re: Shooting at YouTube HQ

Post by Titan Uranus » 2018-04-10 08:57pm

U.P. Cinnabar wrote:
2018-04-06 02:22pm
The NRA deserves to be made hay out of, and given its support for domestic terrorists in the past, neither it or its apologists have any legs to stand on, when playing victim. So fuck you and your preconceptions with a rusty razor.
Still waiting.
TheFeniX wrote:
2018-04-09 01:18pm
Like how Bojack Horseman handled women with guns? Hehe.

That would be a tough sell. We already have instances of "real american" gun owners (Read: white male) getting drunk, mad, etc and shooting someone (usually their wives) in the heat of the moment. It happens way more than it should, but it's still a minuscule percentage of legal gun owners. In the case of "non-white liberal vegan woman commits mass murder with firearm at a billion dollar tech firm in Commifornia!" that's a way to juicy a niche to latch onto and lose the narrative you're thinking of.

If anything, a few far-right (even medium-rare right) groups have already latched onto the idea that "Tech CEOs only seem to care about gun control now that their Ferrari's might risk getting shot up" and shit like "isn't liberal minority women the group they would WANT to have guns?"

And to be fair, most Tech giants took a solid neutral stance on guns for years, while taking hard stances on many other important topics. So it does smack of "we care now that it's affecting, or could affect, us" for them to get involved at this particular moment. I'm not saying they don't have every right to, but we both know how much more important appearances are than facts in these types of situations.
Youtube at the least started fucking with gun/weapons/slingshot channels out of puritanism long before this shooting.

Post Reply