6 ms·

Amazon’s Twitch, Discord, 4chan face New York AG probe after Buffalo shooting

35 points by serverlessmom 4y ago

car_analogy 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- cft 4y ago
- MBCook 4y ago
  The DC sniper attacks were in 2002 before even the founding of MySpace. So that’s probably why.
  - car_analogy 4y ago
    Social media is not the only way (politicians believe) hate and violence spread. For example, the congressional hearings on violence in videogames were in 1993: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_United_States_Senate_hearings_on_video_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_United_States_Senate_hear... Nor did all my examples precede MySpace.
    - WalterGR 4y ago
      Were the murders you mention streamed live on video games? I'm quite sad to see race-baiting on HN. I don't buy the naivete that, golly shucks, there just aren't any other differences between this case and the ones you listed above except for race.
      - car_analogy 4y ago
        > Were the murders you mention streamed live on video games? My point exactly. No murders were streamed live on videogames (or anywhere, in 1993), yet they got congressional hearings. Live-streaming has never been a condition for dragging everyone remotely related to an atrocity through the mud. Of all the sites being investigated, the killings were only streamed on Twitch. If live-streaming was the issue, why involve the other sites?
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        WalterGR 4y ago
        > My point exactly. No, your point is that this reckoning is happening because the alleged killer is white and the victims are black. Trying to change your point to which murders were live-streamed and the exact number of connections to follow for investigation is a smokescreen. > No murders were streamed live on videogames (or anywhere, in 1993), yet they got congressional hearings. Or is your point truly that no deaths 30 years ago resulted in congressional inquiry, and you're shocked that a mass murder planned and live-streamed on social media now is resulting in inquiry?
- madengr 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- winternett 4y ago
  Every time innocent people are killed by a psychopath, everything should get a very hard and sharp "probe"... In hopes of discouraging the shockingly cowardly behavior. Especially the killer(s). There were numerous reports and investigations and even a documentary on the beltway snipers. We shouldn't ask why one incident gets more scrutiny compared to another.
  - blockwriter 4y ago
    I thought we had come to the understanding that “probing” the killer, I.e. giving them, and not the victims, a lot of press, naming them, publishing their image, their ideas, etc. only encouraged other would be mass murderers.
  - car_analogy 4y ago
    > There were numerous reports and investigations and even a documentary on the beltway snipers. Yes, on the snipers themselves. Aside from a gun-control related lawsuit, there was no spillover of negative attention to everyone remotely associated with the snipers' ideology or motives. Oh, there was a Law & Order episode based on this massacre. But they took some artistic liberty with the perpetrators: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0629419/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0629419/
  - chii 4y ago
    > We shouldn't ask why one incident gets more scrutiny compared to another. why not? If the incidents had similar death counts and other neutral metrics, they ought to be similarly treated. The problem with selective scrutiny is that it enables discriminatory, tactical politicalization of an event. If society is to move towards equality and equal treatment of all, remove racism and biases, it has to treat all events with equal importance. In a similar vein, the johnny depp and amber heard suit has revealed that domestic violence is just as much a problem for men, but they are often not believed because society has assigned less importance to an event that otherwise should've been treated equally as the female counter-part.
    - winternett 4y ago
- colechristensen 4y ago
  Seems like the NY AG felt like it, that’s how. It’s not like things weren’t investigated at all in those other situations, here they decided to make a press release about it.
- orf 4y ago
  - monsecchris 4y ago
    For planning: The DC shooters meticulously planned their efforts over decades and fitted out a vehicle. The Waukesha perpetrator spent years describing in detail how much he disliked white people and all the ways he was going to kill them. For mental illness: The Buffalo shooter, in his Discord conversations, admitted to permanently considering suicide for days at a time. He called himself a communist and an eco-terrorist in his manifesto. The DC shooters were determined to not be mentally unwell.
    - orf 4y ago
      The DC attacks showed no regard for race, gender or age. The Waukesha attacker is clearly mentally ill, and has a history of mental illness. The Buffalo shooter did try and commit suicide. That was the attack. But he decided to do so in a clearly racially aggravated way, above and beyond any of the other examples you listed. He did it with forethought, planned online communities with both outright and subtle racist members, and live-streamed it. If you cannot see the difference between this and the other incidents you listed, that’s the “ignoring reality” bit I mentioned earlier. And FYI calling yourself an eco-terrorist isn’t on-par with saying lizard people run the world and FEMA run death camps. When it comes to mental illness people fall into a spectrum.
      - monsecchris 4y ago
        > The DC attacks showed no regard for race, gender or age. "Muhammad's goal in Phase One was to kill six white people a day for 30 days." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.C._sniper_attacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.C._sniper_attacks Conversations end when one side completely disregards reality.
        orf 4y ago
        > Conversations end when one side completely disregards reality. Indeed, because in reality their victims where white, black and hispanic.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  I'll bite. It is pretty simple. Probes like congressional hearings and public AG probes are a public governmental reaction to highly offensive or shocking crimes. Simply put, white supremacist mass shootings are highly offensive and shocking. Yes, they are more shocking and offensive than anti-white mass shootings for most people. And yes, that is racist too
  - qsdf38100 4y ago
    Poor oppressed white people. Victims of racism. Fortunately, some white people have the courage to speak up. In a discussion about a mass murder of black people. Can I recommend you a video? Please give it a chance. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cXZ6BZzQeCQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cXZ6BZzQeCQ
    - car_analogy 4y ago
      > In a discussion about a mass murder of black people. Of course, when the victims are white, it's not a mass murder of white people - it's just a mass murder of people.
      - s1artibartfast 4y ago
        Yes it is asymmetric and stupid. What about it? If this is presented as evidence that reporting and public commentary has bias and inconsistencies, I think that is already known.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      I'm not sure if your sarcasm is directed at me or someone else. I do think it is unproductive to turn the conversation into a competition, or dismiss someone else's suffering. I think we can all agree it is both sad and disgusting when white or black people die in racially motivated violence.
      - qsdf38100 4y ago
        Yes, sorry. Nowadays I'm more and more concerned about the sincerity of people seemingly genuinely asking "questions". You know... Supremacists aren't always open with their views, and I know for a fact that the non-open ones tend to ask toxic questions and say things that implicitly push such extreme political views. I hope you're not one of them.
- mr_toad 4y ago
  > there was no such probe for the DC sniper attacks that killed 1 I can think of two reasons. One, the perpetrators didn’t use social media, and two, there was no social media for them to use.
shitlord 4y ago
Why does reddit get a pass? The shooter was posting on reddit until the day of the shooting. He posted about tactical gear and ammo, which were actually relevant to the execution of the attack.
- ziml77 4y ago
  Who said there's any pass? From the AG press release: > Specifically, the investigations will focus on those platforms that may have been used to stream, promote, or plan the event, including but not limited to Twitch (owned by Amazon), 4chan, 8chan, and Discord.
  - shitlord 4y ago
    Sure, but why isn't it being called out explicitly? Twitch was used to stream the event, 4chan/8chan/Discord were likely used to promote the event, and reddit was likely used to plan it. His post history suggests he used the site to obtain tactical gear [0], so it probably played a more important role than Twitch (a streaming site which is interchangeable with its competitors). https://camas.unddit.com/#{%22author%22:%22Jimbo-boiii%22,%22resultSize%22:100} https://camas.unddit.com/#{%22author%22:%22Jimbo-boiii%22,%2...
    - drusenko 4y ago
      The answer is probably shockingly simple: because the AG’s office likely wasn’t aware of the Reddit behavior when they issued the press release.
  - Caput-mortuum 4y ago
    If we are to believe the shooter's manifesto; he heavily used Reddit and was a relatively new user of 4chan, which he initially browsed due to boredom when he heard about it having a board about firearms (something he obsessively posted about on Reddit) called '/k/' and a board about the outdoors called '/out/.' He then found a board about politics called '/pol/' which lead him to discover full fledged hardcore neo-nazi websites which promote violence, sites which he lists. These being; "The Daily Stormer," "World Truth Videos," and "Daily Archives." After this point he says he started agreeing with these distorted world views. I believe the concern is that by focusing only on the platforms he used to "stream, promote, or plan the event" the probe is effectively neutered and won't lead to real change. It appears that the three neo-nazi websites he discovered through messages on the /pol/ board of 4chan are the most culpable in his radicalization, but these three key sites that hold this culpability are not mentioned as being targets of the probe. Also in his manifesto the 8chan link appears to go to a real working website called 8chan, but it is not the url of the actual 8chan website according to a quick google search. This leads to even more questions too, like why did they not mention if they would also probe police conduct when they allowed him to have firearms. Despite him making a shooting threat that was investigated prior?
RonMarken 4y ago
America seems to have a blase culture about actually preventing these mass-shootings after they occur outside of virtue-signaling (see the popular Onion trope "No Way to Prevent This") but at the same time one could have the concern of certain entities unfairly targeting certain otherwise benign platforms that may have been used by individuals encouraging certain criminal acts with liability thus leading to concerns like the stripping of Section 230 publisher protections and the resulting chilling effects on free-speech.
- parineum 4y ago
  >America seems to have a blase culture about actually preventing these mass-shootings after they occur outside of virtue-signaling The truth is that people value the freedoms that allow these shootings more than they value preventing them. It's simply not acceptable to say that you're okay with people dying sometimes but people make these decisions constantly when there's not someone publicly pleading to think of the children. Guns is the example here but that's just where Europeans see a big discrepancy in conclusion but the same decisions are made everywhere. Americans just have a slightly different position but that slight difference is magnified because the vast majority of other positions are very similar.
goodguyamerikan 4y ago
I remember before Trump came and there were Islamist attacks across the world and praying was considered enough. (Besides worrying about victimized muslims). These actions seem excessive to me.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
StanislavPetrov 4y ago
Just another naked grab for power and assault on the 1st Amendment by authoritarians in government. The Buffalo murderer was flagged to police long before the attack for making violent threats. He was involuntarily held in a mental facility briefly as a result. Yet there are demands for "greater surveillance powers" for the government. It's sickening to see our so-called "leaders" exploit this tragedy to further carve way our freedoms, but unfortunately that is par for the course.

35 points by serverlessmom 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
cft 4y ago
MBCook 4y ago
The DC sniper attacks were in 2002 before even the founding of MySpace. So that’s probably why.
- car_analogy 4y ago
  Social media is not the only way (politicians believe) hate and violence spread. For example, the congressional hearings on violence in videogames were in 1993: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_United_States_Senate_hearings_on_video_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_United_States_Senate_hear... Nor did all my examples precede MySpace.
  - WalterGR 4y ago
    Were the murders you mention streamed live on video games? I'm quite sad to see race-baiting on HN. I don't buy the naivete that, golly shucks, there just aren't any other differences between this case and the ones you listed above except for race.
    - car_analogy 4y ago
      > Were the murders you mention streamed live on video games? My point exactly. No murders were streamed live on videogames (or anywhere, in 1993), yet they got congressional hearings. Live-streaming has never been a condition for dragging everyone remotely related to an atrocity through the mud. Of all the sites being investigated, the killings were only streamed on Twitch. If live-streaming was the issue, why involve the other sites?
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - WalterGR 4y ago
        > My point exactly. No, your point is that this reckoning is happening because the alleged killer is white and the victims are black. Trying to change your point to which murders were live-streamed and the exact number of connections to follow for investigation is a smokescreen. > No murders were streamed live on videogames (or anywhere, in 1993), yet they got congressional hearings. Or is your point truly that no deaths 30 years ago resulted in congressional inquiry, and you're shocked that a mass murder planned and live-streamed on social media now is resulting in inquiry?
madengr 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
winternett 4y ago
Every time innocent people are killed by a psychopath, everything should get a very hard and sharp "probe"... In hopes of discouraging the shockingly cowardly behavior. Especially the killer(s). There were numerous reports and investigations and even a documentary on the beltway snipers. We shouldn't ask why one incident gets more scrutiny compared to another.
- blockwriter 4y ago
  I thought we had come to the understanding that “probing” the killer, I.e. giving them, and not the victims, a lot of press, naming them, publishing their image, their ideas, etc. only encouraged other would be mass murderers.
- car_analogy 4y ago
  > There were numerous reports and investigations and even a documentary on the beltway snipers. Yes, on the snipers themselves. Aside from a gun-control related lawsuit, there was no spillover of negative attention to everyone remotely associated with the snipers' ideology or motives. Oh, there was a Law & Order episode based on this massacre. But they took some artistic liberty with the perpetrators: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0629419/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0629419/
- chii 4y ago
  > We shouldn't ask why one incident gets more scrutiny compared to another. why not? If the incidents had similar death counts and other neutral metrics, they ought to be similarly treated. The problem with selective scrutiny is that it enables discriminatory, tactical politicalization of an event. If society is to move towards equality and equal treatment of all, remove racism and biases, it has to treat all events with equal importance. In a similar vein, the johnny depp and amber heard suit has revealed that domestic violence is just as much a problem for men, but they are often not believed because society has assigned less importance to an event that otherwise should've been treated equally as the female counter-part.
  - winternett 4y ago
colechristensen 4y ago
Seems like the NY AG felt like it, that’s how. It’s not like things weren’t investigated at all in those other situations, here they decided to make a press release about it.
orf 4y ago
- monsecchris 4y ago
  For planning: The DC shooters meticulously planned their efforts over decades and fitted out a vehicle. The Waukesha perpetrator spent years describing in detail how much he disliked white people and all the ways he was going to kill them. For mental illness: The Buffalo shooter, in his Discord conversations, admitted to permanently considering suicide for days at a time. He called himself a communist and an eco-terrorist in his manifesto. The DC shooters were determined to not be mentally unwell.
  - orf 4y ago
    The DC attacks showed no regard for race, gender or age. The Waukesha attacker is clearly mentally ill, and has a history of mental illness. The Buffalo shooter did try and commit suicide. That was the attack. But he decided to do so in a clearly racially aggravated way, above and beyond any of the other examples you listed. He did it with forethought, planned online communities with both outright and subtle racist members, and live-streamed it. If you cannot see the difference between this and the other incidents you listed, that’s the “ignoring reality” bit I mentioned earlier. And FYI calling yourself an eco-terrorist isn’t on-par with saying lizard people run the world and FEMA run death camps. When it comes to mental illness people fall into a spectrum.
    - monsecchris 4y ago
      > The DC attacks showed no regard for race, gender or age. "Muhammad's goal in Phase One was to kill six white people a day for 30 days." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.C._sniper_attacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.C._sniper_attacks Conversations end when one side completely disregards reality.
      - orf 4y ago
        > Conversations end when one side completely disregards reality. Indeed, because in reality their victims where white, black and hispanic.
s1artibartfast 4y ago
I'll bite. It is pretty simple. Probes like congressional hearings and public AG probes are a public governmental reaction to highly offensive or shocking crimes. Simply put, white supremacist mass shootings are highly offensive and shocking. Yes, they are more shocking and offensive than anti-white mass shootings for most people. And yes, that is racist too
- qsdf38100 4y ago
  Poor oppressed white people. Victims of racism. Fortunately, some white people have the courage to speak up. In a discussion about a mass murder of black people. Can I recommend you a video? Please give it a chance. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cXZ6BZzQeCQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cXZ6BZzQeCQ
  - car_analogy 4y ago
    > In a discussion about a mass murder of black people. Of course, when the victims are white, it's not a mass murder of white people - it's just a mass murder of people.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      Yes it is asymmetric and stupid. What about it? If this is presented as evidence that reporting and public commentary has bias and inconsistencies, I think that is already known.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    I'm not sure if your sarcasm is directed at me or someone else. I do think it is unproductive to turn the conversation into a competition, or dismiss someone else's suffering. I think we can all agree it is both sad and disgusting when white or black people die in racially motivated violence.
    - qsdf38100 4y ago
      Yes, sorry. Nowadays I'm more and more concerned about the sincerity of people seemingly genuinely asking "questions". You know... Supremacists aren't always open with their views, and I know for a fact that the non-open ones tend to ask toxic questions and say things that implicitly push such extreme political views. I hope you're not one of them.
mr_toad 4y ago
> there was no such probe for the DC sniper attacks that killed 1 I can think of two reasons. One, the perpetrators didn’t use social media, and two, there was no social media for them to use.

Why does reddit get a pass? The shooter was posting on reddit until the day of the shooting. He posted about tactical gear and ammo, which were actually relevant to the execution of the attack.

ziml77 4y ago
Who said there's any pass? From the AG press release: > Specifically, the investigations will focus on those platforms that may have been used to stream, promote, or plan the event, including but not limited to Twitch (owned by Amazon), 4chan, 8chan, and Discord.
- shitlord 4y ago
  Sure, but why isn't it being called out explicitly? Twitch was used to stream the event, 4chan/8chan/Discord were likely used to promote the event, and reddit was likely used to plan it. His post history suggests he used the site to obtain tactical gear [0], so it probably played a more important role than Twitch (a streaming site which is interchangeable with its competitors). https://camas.unddit.com/#{%22author%22:%22Jimbo-boiii%22,%22resultSize%22:100} https://camas.unddit.com/#{%22author%22:%22Jimbo-boiii%22,%2...
  - drusenko 4y ago
    The answer is probably shockingly simple: because the AG’s office likely wasn’t aware of the Reddit behavior when they issued the press release.
- Caput-mortuum 4y ago
  If we are to believe the shooter's manifesto; he heavily used Reddit and was a relatively new user of 4chan, which he initially browsed due to boredom when he heard about it having a board about firearms (something he obsessively posted about on Reddit) called '/k/' and a board about the outdoors called '/out/.' He then found a board about politics called '/pol/' which lead him to discover full fledged hardcore neo-nazi websites which promote violence, sites which he lists. These being; "The Daily Stormer," "World Truth Videos," and "Daily Archives." After this point he says he started agreeing with these distorted world views. I believe the concern is that by focusing only on the platforms he used to "stream, promote, or plan the event" the probe is effectively neutered and won't lead to real change. It appears that the three neo-nazi websites he discovered through messages on the /pol/ board of 4chan are the most culpable in his radicalization, but these three key sites that hold this culpability are not mentioned as being targets of the probe. Also in his manifesto the 8chan link appears to go to a real working website called 8chan, but it is not the url of the actual 8chan website according to a quick google search. This leads to even more questions too, like why did they not mention if they would also probe police conduct when they allowed him to have firearms. Despite him making a shooting threat that was investigated prior?

RonMarken 4y ago

America seems to have a blase culture about actually preventing these mass-shootings after they occur outside of virtue-signaling (see the popular Onion trope "No Way to Prevent This") but at the same time one could have the concern of certain entities unfairly targeting certain otherwise benign platforms that may have been used by individuals encouraging certain criminal acts with liability thus leading to concerns like the stripping of Section 230 publisher protections and the resulting chilling effects on free-speech.

parineum 4y ago
>America seems to have a blase culture about actually preventing these mass-shootings after they occur outside of virtue-signaling The truth is that people value the freedoms that allow these shootings more than they value preventing them. It's simply not acceptable to say that you're okay with people dying sometimes but people make these decisions constantly when there's not someone publicly pleading to think of the children. Guns is the example here but that's just where Europeans see a big discrepancy in conclusion but the same decisions are made everywhere. Americans just have a slightly different position but that slight difference is magnified because the vast majority of other positions are very similar.

goodguyamerikan 4y ago

I remember before Trump came and there were Islamist attacks across the world and praying was considered enough. (Besides worrying about victimized muslims). These actions seem excessive to me.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

StanislavPetrov 4y ago

Just another naked grab for power and assault on the 1st Amendment by authoritarians in government. The Buffalo murderer was flagged to police long before the attack for making violent threats. He was involuntarily held in a mental facility briefly as a result. Yet there are demands for "greater surveillance powers" for the government. It's sickening to see our so-called "leaders" exploit this tragedy to further carve way our freedoms, but unfortunately that is par for the course.