Announcement

**Spiffor** · October 21, 2006, 08:21

However kudicrous it sounds, happy slapping is largely motivated by the histrionics of airing them to an audience.

It is rare to see purely gratuitous violence. Happy slapping is not exactly "gratuitous", in that the culprit gets "air" time. Remove that "air" time, and you remove one of the causes.

I don't know enough about the dynamics of petty crime in the UK to tell what are the other factors involved in happy slappings however.

**Pekka** · October 21, 2006, 08:25

TAke them off YouTube and you think this will stop?

No. YouTube is just one location. Listen, you are facing an impossible task with limiting and censorship. You are fighting the internet and the whole virtual world. I think even the French can't do that. Unless you want to do something completely useless that sounds good.

Sorry, it's the truth, you are looking at the typical way of this, that is stupid, wrong and completely screwed up.

**VetLegion** · October 21, 2006, 08:40

If they ban YouTube in Britain it will mean more bandwidth for the rest of us

**Spiffor** · October 21, 2006, 08:43

Besides, it's not merely YouTube or its competitors. Happy slappings existed before that, with the generalization of camera-recorders on cell phones.

We are living in an age where any westerner can produce his own digital media and distribute it, be it with blogs or with p2p.

This asks the question: considering that the histrionics often motivate the violence, how do we prevent people from producing/distributing violent material?
We can try to fight against the spread of IT, or we can try to make people think that violent histrionics ain't cool. None is easy.

**Spiffor** · October 21, 2006, 08:43

Originally posted by VetLegion
If they ban YouTube in Britain it will mean more bandwidth for the rest of us

Isn't YouTube basically a p2p system?

**Pekka** · October 21, 2006, 08:45

We should create two-tier internet. THese tubes, these tubes would be only allowed to people who like the internet free, with as little control as possible.

This second tier internets would be for people who remember what one of the driving ideas was. The second tier internets is for those who do not want government or business control over it. The second internets is for people who prefer hackers keeping the internet alive, just like they built it in the first place.

The second tier internet tubes is for people who feel the importance of anonymity and freedom in virtual world, as in we are more equal, share of knowedlge, ideas, everything. For free. No one getting in between.

The second tier network is for idiots who actually believe in it, believed in it and saw the ending at some point, when businesses or/and government starts to sanction, control it.. with excuses like pornography, crime, hackers, viruses... evil evil network of tubes.

Well, I'd still like to take my chances with the second tier village idiot network. If you want all the stuff like control and say in things, youi can have the first tier internets. It's for control freaks.

**Pekka** · October 21, 2006, 08:46

"We can try to fight against the spread of IT, or we can try to make people think that violent histrionics ain't cool."

Yes, adn the first one is a stupid suggestion as the second is trivial. Of course violence is not cool, but if a person is too stupid to realize it, their ass belongs to jail.

We can't 'prevent' all crime you know..

**Tattila the Hun** · October 21, 2006, 08:52

Originally posted by Spiffor

Isn't YouTube basically a p2p system?

Nah, they are stored in a central server, not on users computer.

I think...

Originally posted by Pekka

We can't 'prevent' all crime you know..

Solution?

**Pekka** · October 21, 2006, 08:54

youtube is NOT p2p-network.

**Spiffor** · October 21, 2006, 09:45

Originally posted by Pekka
the second is trivial. Of course violence is not cool, but if a person is too stupid to realize it, their ass belongs to jail.

We can't 'prevent' all crime you know..

No, the second is not trivial. Under Thatcher, crime became more heavily punished, and the prison population has exploded. At the same time, crime increased dramatically.

Do you know what "preventing" crime means? It means that we avoid crime before it happens. What's better? To have a victim murdered, and then to have the killer executed, or is it better NOT to have the murder in the first place? Is it better to have people mugged and then yougsters sent to prison, or NO people mugged in the first place?

You'll notice there are very different crime rates from country to country. And these differences are often very hard to explain. A country with a high crime rate is bad at preventing crime (regardless on whether they punish it). A country with a low crime rate is good at preventing crime, even in the occurences where it punishes it more lightly when it occurs.

To me, what matters most is the low crime rate to begin with. I would never wish to live in a crime-ridden city, even though I'm sure that my inevitable murder will be avenged after my death.

**Pekka** · October 21, 2006, 10:00

No no I meant the second as in .. promoting that violence is bad. I think this is trivial as a measure, it should be done always anyway. The jail thing is not too trivial, as in when you go to jail and for how long and what other measures are to be done. That's not very simple.

You just got me wrong.

And I meant we can't prevent all crime, like these chavs are quite fond of violence. It might have been a thing that draw them into being chavs in the first place, thus I don't see what can be done, itäs a mental problem they have. They are idiots. I don't see why they should be walking free, when they are caught in serious violence.

And yes, while throwing asswhipes into jail, there must be other measures done, like promoting non-violence. These are not excluding measures, rather overlapping.

**Spiffor** · October 21, 2006, 10:07

OK, sorry, I didn't catch it then

**Pekka** · October 21, 2006, 10:11

No you didn't!

Damn it.

**SlowwHand** · October 21, 2006, 10:22

YouTube just removed quite a number of videos that were...trademarked or something. Thousands.

Save me the research time, if you would, please.
What are Chavs main complaint?

Announcement

UK MP's finally getting tough on chav violence!

UK MP's finally getting tough on chav violence!

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment