The Youtube shooting

[SunsetBengal]

First of all, I can't believe this hasn't already been a huge topic of discussion around here, today.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/father-of-youtube-shooter-says-he-warned-about-daughter/ar-AAvqwQM?OCID=ansmsnnews11


My own thoughts? Perhaps giving every idiot a platform on which to make big money, for essentially doing nothing productive, wasn't such a great idea? Here you have a case of an individual who found an easy way to make money, just keep generating the views. However, when her content starting going over the top, moderation had to be enforced, thus cutting off her relatively cheap and easy revenue stream.

The result cannot be what any of the tech folks could have ever envisioned. I think some very serious oversight and regulations are on the very near horizons for the social media companies.

[*Nately120*]

(04-04-2018, 08:18 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I think some very serious oversight and regulations are on the very near horizons for the social media companies.

Regulations in response to a shooting?  You must be joking.

[StLucieBengal]

(04-04-2018, 08:18 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: First of all, I can't believe this hasn't already been a huge topic of discussion around here, today.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/father-of-youtube-shooter-says-he-warned-about-daughter/ar-AAvqwQM?OCID=ansmsnnews11


My own thoughts? Perhaps giving every idiot a platform on which to make big money, for essentially doing nothing productive, wasn't such a great idea? Here you have a case of an individual who found an easy way to make money, just keep generating the views. However, when her content starting going over the top, moderation had to be enforced, thus cutting off her relatively cheap and easy revenue stream.

The result cannot be what any of the tech folks could have ever envisioned. I think some very serious oversight and regulations are on the very near horizons for the social media companies.

They are either a social media platform or they are a publisher. Now that they are regulating what people can post they. Become a publisher and are held to the same legal standards of a publisher. I can not believe they would put themselves into a potential lawsuit over some virtue signaling.

[Benton]

It’s been a weird several years for those of us in the media.basically, for the last century and a half, media was trusted to sift through info to get put fake stuff and crazy stuff and dangerous stuff. Then a decade ago, corporate interests started shrinking media to compete with free social media. That’s led to people using social media to completely discredit traditional media. Which is leading us back to “hey, somebody with experience needs to sift through this.”

[Westwood Bengal]

(04-04-2018, 08:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Regulations in response to a shooting?  You must be joking.

[*michaelsean*]

(04-04-2018, 08:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Regulations in response to a shooting?  You must be joking.

I hope nobody thinks we should regulate social media because a crazy person thought she was being mistreated.

[SunsetBengal]

(04-04-2018, 08:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Regulations in response to a shooting?  You must be joking.

Perhaps not strictly because of the shooting.  But, with the recent changes influencing content moderation, there will likely be more who lose their primary revenue streams in the near future.  

Not just that, but look at what's going on with Facebook and the whole data mining company.  Seems like everyone was cool with it, when it helped Obama reach a second term.  But, now that folks know the same people aided the Trump campaign, it's a different story now..

Regulation is coming to social media companies, sooner than many are ready to admit.

[*Nately120*]

(04-04-2018, 09:03 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Perhaps not strictly because of the shooting.  But, with the recent changes influencing content moderation, there will likely be more who lose their primary revenue streams in the near future.  

Not just that, but look at what's going on with Facebook and the whole data mining company.  Seems like everyone was cool with it, when it helped Obama reach a second term.  But, now that folks know the same people aided the Trump campaign, it's a different story now..

Regulation is coming to social media companies, sooner than many are ready to admit.

It'll happen, but it shouldn't.  It's a free market, so if you don't like how youtube monetizes your stupid videos or what facebook does with the oodles of personal crap you hand them you are free to bugger right off.  Or we could just cry out for daddy government to save us from ourselves, yet again.

[SunsetBengal]

(04-04-2018, 09:15 PM)Nately120 Wrote: It'll happen, but it shouldn't.  It's a free market, so if you don't like how youtube monetizes your stupid videos or what facebook does with the oodles of personal crap you hand them you are free to bugger right off.  Or we could just cry out for daddy government to save us from ourselves, yet again.

Interesting.  It would be amazing if folks could take the same approach toward all the 2A hoopla.

[Arturo Bandini]

(04-04-2018, 08:18 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: First of all, I can't believe this hasn't already been a huge topic of discussion around here, today.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/father-of-youtube-shooter-says-he-warned-about-daughter/ar-AAvqwQM?OCID=ansmsnnews11


My own thoughts?  Perhaps giving every idiot a platform on which to make big money, for essentially doing nothing productive, wasn't such a great idea?  Here you have a case of an individual who found an easy way to make money, just keep generating the views.  However, when her content starting going over the top, moderation had to be enforced, thus cutting off her relatively cheap and easy revenue stream.

The result cannot be what any of the tech folks could have ever envisioned.  I think some very serious oversight and regulations are on the very near horizons for the social media companies.

If stupid people makes money with it, it is just because more stupid people are watching them.

This is a consequence not a cause.

[SunsetBengal]

(04-04-2018, 10:05 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: If stupid people makes money with it, it is just because more stupid people are watching them.

This is a consequence not a cause.

Which is why I suggested that it might not have been such a good idea..

[THE Bigzoman]

(04-04-2018, 08:18 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: First of all, I can't believe this hasn't already been a huge topic of discussion around here, today.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/father-of-youtube-shooter-says-he-warned-about-daughter/ar-AAvqwQM?OCID=ansmsnnews11


My own thoughts?  Perhaps giving every idiot a platform on which to make big money, for essentially doing nothing productive, wasn't such a great idea?  Here you have a case of an individual who found an easy way to make money, just keep generating the views.  However, when her content starting going over the top, moderation had to be enforced, thus cutting off her relatively cheap and easy revenue stream.

The result cannot be what any of the tech folks could have ever envisioned.  I think some very serious oversight and regulations are on the very near horizons for the social media companies.

Says who? You?

Content creators on Youtube can be incredibly productive. They entertain, inform, and provide a long overdue alternative to the mainstream media.

You may not think having a youtube channel can be productive, but the followings, subscribers, and views say otherwise.

[SunsetBengal]

(04-04-2018, 10:33 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Says who? You?

Content creators on Youtube can be incredibly productive. They entertain, inform, and provide a long overdue alternative to the mainstream media.

You may not think having a youtube channel can be productive, but the followings, subscribers, and views say otherwise.

Well, that IS my opinion.  I guess that we just have differing opinions on what doing anything productive means. 

But, not to deny the one's who are making nice money from it.  They should just enjoy it while it lasts.  It's only a matter of time, until the next person loses their monetization over content acceptability, and goes on some outburst over it.  

[THE Bigzoman]

(04-04-2018, 10:40 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, that IS my opinion.  I guess that we just have differing opinions on what doing anything productive means. 

But, not to deny the one's who are making nice money from it.  They should just enjoy it while it lasts.  It's only a matter of time, until the next person loses their monetization over content acceptability, and goes on some outburst over it.  

I can see why people shouldn't depend on a monopoly like Youtube for their main squeeze. Even before the "Adpocalypse" Youtube hasn't exactly had a great relationship with content creators. 

How would you define "productive" then? If thousands of people tune in a on a regular basis and expect you to deliver content they want, and you provide said content, you're meeting demand in the same way that a clothing store meet people's demand for yoga pants.

People want what you produce, so you produce it. That's productivity.

[SunsetBengal]

(04-04-2018, 10:51 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: I can see why people shouldn't depend on a monopoly like Youtube for their main squeeze. Even before the "Adpocalypse" Youtube hasn't exactly had a great relationship with content creators. 

How would you define "productive" then? If thousands of people tune in a on a regular basis and expect you to deliver content they want, and you provide said content, you're meeting demand in the same way that a clothing store meet people's demand for yoga pants.

People want what you produce, so you produce it. That's productivity.

Sure, it keeps the drug cartels in business, as well.  Dealers on the corner face the same situation, people want their...  product.  

I'll stick with the dope dealer analogy for a minute.  If all the dope to the biggest supplier were to suddenly dry up, that dealer would throw a massive fit, likely shoot whomever he felt was at cause.  Meanwhile, all the tweakers would just move on to the next source, even if it was watered down.  

My point is that stupid content for stupid viewers is not unlike dope to users.  Both are pointless and have very little benefit to the success of society, but both lend plenty to it's decline.  People idling their time away, trying to get as good at video games as the top YouTube earner is very similar to the kid on the corner slinging sacs that thinks that someday he'll be the kingpin making the big dough.

That Iranian chick that shot up 3 people at YouTube?  She's just like the local dealer that lost her supply.  No more easy money.  

[Dill]

Wonder what the Iranians thought of her videos.

https://heavy.com/news/2018/04/nasim-aghdam-youtube-channel-video-nasime-sabz/

I also wonder if there was was some double standard on content.

[Au165]

(04-04-2018, 08:18 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: First of all, I can't believe this hasn't already been a huge topic of discussion around here, today.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/father-of-youtube-shooter-says-he-warned-about-daughter/ar-AAvqwQM?OCID=ansmsnnews11


My own thoughts?  Perhaps giving every idiot a platform on which to make big money, for essentially doing nothing productive, wasn't such a great idea?  Here you have a case of an individual who found an easy way to make money, just keep generating the views.  However, when her content starting going over the top, moderation had to be enforced, thus cutting off her relatively cheap and easy revenue stream.

The result cannot be what any of the tech folks could have ever envisioned.  I think some very serious oversight and regulations are on the very near horizons for the social media companies.

Trying to tie the "giving every idiot a platform" to the shooting is mixing in personal opinions on social media into the tragic events and it really isn't related. This feels like you using a tragedy to take the the platform "get off my lawn" to "easy money" from doing something that in your opinion adds "Little benefit to the success of society"". This is the equivalent of getting fired and shooting up her employer, she got "fired" by YouTube and shot up the place that fired her. We have seen this play out for decades, it is just the modern version of a very old pastime. It is literally the whole reason people tend to get fired on Fridays.

[*michaelsean*]

Some people think they have a right to be heard, and that someone is supposed to provide them with the platform.

I'm no youtube expert, but 5000 subscribers doesn't sound like many. I think the top people have over 10 million.

[*Nately120*]

(04-04-2018, 10:40 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, that IS my opinion.  I guess that we just have differing opinions on what doing anything productive means.  

Meh, you realize one of the most popular mainstream shows produced during our lifetime involved people eating disgusting things on a billion dollar stage in prime time, right?  Our ability as a culture to NOT make stupid crap popular is pretty low.

My work buddies and I were talking about how mainstream popularity drags so many things into the dregs of appealing to the lowest common denominator for the sake of popularity.  When something becomes crap it is due to the audience demanding to be shown crap.

Quick examples in mainstream entertainment becoming stupid:
Happy Days was about the teen life of Ron Howard's character, but the Fonz was an intentionally shallow and stupid character that people couldn't get enough of, so eventually the show is written around him and he's ski jumping over a shark.

Family Matters went from a show about the family unit to Steve Urkel inventing robots and teleporters and stuff.

Rocky was a movie about an underdog going the distance with the champ and how it affected his life and it's not really about boxing.  Sequels were about Rocky being nigh-invincible and beating the crap out of everyone.

Rambo again we see the first movie being about the horrors of war and how it damages a person.  Later movies are about Rambo fighting entire wars himself and killing a zillion people because they are bad and he is awesome.


Oh lord, I could go on.  Anyways, the point is that everything turns into total crap once the majority get their grubby paws on it.  That's just the way it is.  Stupid stuff has been getting a baffling amount of attention for generations.  The only difference is that Youtube lets anyone give the public the stupid crap it craves, not just billion dollar television monopolies.

[fredtoast]

(04-04-2018, 09:03 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote:  Seems like everyone was cool with it, when it helped Obama reach a second term.  But, now that folks know the same people aided the Trump campaign, it's a different story now..

Uh, it has always been a different story.

Obama went on Facebook and said "Hey this is Obama will you help me".

Trump went on Facebook and said "Hey take this randome personality test that will allow me to mine all of your friends and contacts.".

The real question is why anyone would think it was NOT a different story.