Slashdot Mirror


French Inquiry Launched After Live Suicide Broadcast On Periscope (bbc.com)

An anonymous reader writes: French authorities have launched an investigation after a young woman recorded her suicide which streamed live to over 1,000 connected followers on the online video app Periscope. Prosecutors in Egly, Essone, a suburb 15 miles south of Paris, confirmed they had opened the inquiry following the incident which saw the 19-year-old throw herself under a commuter train at a railway station on Tuesday.BBC reports: Previously, she had filmed herself in her flat discussing how she intended to make a video to "send a message", warning younger viewers not to continue to watch what would be a "shocking" act, it was reported. During the filming, the young woman claimed to have been raped and named her attacker, according to the reports. It is not the first time that Periscope has been linked to inappropriate content.

108 comments

  1. She warned them ahead of time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but they still decided to continue broadcasting. That's pretty damning.

    1. Re:She warned them ahead of time... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is the 21st century's equivalent of watching an execution, slowing down and creating a traffic jam to catch a glimpse of an accident on the freeway, or gawking at someone about to jump off the roof of a building. Nothing new here: human beings are disgusting voyeurs, irresistibly attracted to other people's misery, be it in online or on a sidewalk.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:She warned them ahead of time... by Lab+Rat+Jason · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who is the "THEY" you are referring to here? It's not like there is a periscope producer with her hand over the cutoff button, waiting to decide if the content is no appropriate for broadcast... oh and also, does France have regulatory control over internet streaming? In the US, we've got the FCC, but they don't deal with decency on the net... only on TV, and even they couldn't stop Janet Jackson from showing off some nipple. There is no "THEY" to actively make a decision to continue broadcasting, and there never will be. It's the internet.

      --
      Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
    3. Re:She warned them ahead of time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhr, I haven't used periscope so my understanding is probably off. But don't you mean that she warned herself and then she continued broadcasting? If that's not what you mean, then who was the "they" that continued broadcasting?

    4. Re: She warned them ahead of time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Over-the-air' TV. Important distinction.

    5. Re:She warned them ahead of time... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Who is the "THEY" you are referring to here? It's not like there is a periscope producer with her hand over the cutoff button, waiting to decide if the content is no appropriate for broadcast.

      I don't know about Periscope, but I know Twitch goes out of their way to flag people who have 'inappropriate' content.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:She warned them ahead of time... by LMariachi · · Score: 2

      > human beings are disgusting voyeurs, irresistibly attracted to other people's misery, be it in online or on a sidewalk

      People aren't fascinated by car crashes and televised suicides because they're "attracted to misery," otherwise the homeless people on that sidewalk would get a lot more attention instead of being avoided and ignored. The behaviors people are fascinated by are those that are markedly out of the ordinary. Most people aren't viscerally interested in routine mental illness, but when illness manifests as a serial killer or just a guy holding an especially wacky sign it's interesting because it's not something one sees every day.

      People enjoy looking at rainbows and dramatic sunsets too.

    7. Re:She warned them ahead of time... by Lab+Rat+Jason · · Score: 1

      but OP said "but they still decided to continue broadcasting" suggesting that someone is actively watching the stream and deciding whether a stream should continue or not... the reality is that people who get flagged do so after the fact, and only after repeated complaints.

      --
      Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
    8. Re:She warned them ahead of time... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      that's true

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  2. someone does something dumb.... by ganjadude · · Score: 1

    while live streaming???? also water is wet. Not sure what kind of investigation there is to be had here, i mean unless periscope somehow is controlling people making them be stupid on camera, but im pretty sure thats just the human ego which causes it

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    1. Re:someone does something dumb.... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Funny

      They should rename the service Perish-scope, so viewers know what to expect.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:someone does something dumb.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      She accuses and names somebody to have raped her during her video, hence a good reason for an investigation.

    3. Re:someone does something dumb.... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 0

      If there are logs of people cheering her on, that may be of interest, too. Even if not illegal, they could be called out publicly and shamed.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    4. Re:someone does something dumb.... by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      just what we need, more world wide shaming of people.....

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    5. Re:someone does something dumb.... by Lotana · · Score: 1

      And what would be your solution to online bullying? Blaming the victim?

      Very sad that she did not get required level of support.

    6. Re:someone does something dumb.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shaming would serve no purpose but you propose to do it anyway because "there's no other solution". You are a stupid dumbfuck. Go fart and periscope it.

    7. Re:someone does something dumb.... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      That's a funny definition of no purpose.

      People who cheered her on (if any) would be very embarrassed to be called out on it. See also people on a ledge and people yelling "jump!" But put a camera on them yelling this and they shut up.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    8. Re:someone does something dumb.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what the fuck would you, Einstein, do if any of those shamed were pushed to suicide by your dumb doucheflake anctics?
      Go shit some Doritos asswipe.

  3. Video or it didn't happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pictures of parts will be accepted. But blood and guts must be fresh. Entrails exuding stench will go a long way in substantiating this far-fetched story.

  4. At very least the ad revenue should go to the gov by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 0

    At very least the ad revenue should go to the government to cover there costs from this.

  5. Pre-clearance? Censor delay? by Tiger4 · · Score: 1

    Unless Periscope knew what the content was, as it unfolded, they couldn't know they were broadcasting a suicide. So they would not be in a position to stop it.

    I suppose it will unfold in the "investigation," but someone would have to watching her channel and then warn "the higher ups" at Periscope in time for them to cut it off. And frankly I can believe there are a lot more voyeurs who would just let it happen and not say a thing, even if they knew who to call/write/tweet

    --
    Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
  6. How exactly is that connection made? by H3lldr0p · · Score: 2

    ...Periscope has been linked to inappropriate content

    Exactly how is this software/company "linked" to inappropriate content in this case? Did someone from the company bully the young woman? Did someone from the company slip something into her coffee? I'm not certain how one logically links the actions of a third party to the platform they use to disseminate a message or actions.

    Likewise, I'm going to avoid the "inappropriate" portion. Because that's even more silly. There's good reason we have safe harbor laws when it comes to this sort of thing. It's not Periscope's fault someone used their software to do this. It's not like they can control anyone's actions.

    Poppycock! It's all poppycock!

    1. Re:How exactly is that connection made? by Calydor · · Score: 1

      They are linked in much the same way tumblr, imgur etc. are linked to inappropriate content. Slashdot too.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:How exactly is that connection made? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey now, be nice. They're nowhere near as awful as tumblr. This was just some random stream they didn't know about.

  7. Did anyone try to stop it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And frankly I can believe there are a lot more voyeurs who would just let it happen and not say a thing, even if they knew who to call/write/tweet

    Why didn't one of those "over 1000 followers" call the police to try to stop it? Maybe they couldn't have been in time(?) but why the Hell didn't someone try. Have we become the don't give a shit society?

    1. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      Because she didn't tell them she was going to kill herself before she jumped in front of the train?

    2. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by twotacocombo · · Score: 1

      Why didn't one of those "over 1000 followers" call the police to try to stop it? Maybe they couldn't have been in time(?) but why the Hell didn't someone try. Have we become the don't give a shit society?

      Who are we to tell someone else what they can/can't do with their lives? If she wanted to kill herself, that's her decision to make. Why should the onus be on the rest of society to 'protect' her from herself? I know it's not the feel-good moral crusader answer to this situation, but it's really none of our fucking business. Life can be hard and tragic, but worry about living yours and let others worry about living theirs.

    3. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we know that someone didn't try?
      Did they even know she was going to kill herself?

    4. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why didn't one of those "over 1000 followers" call the police to try to stop it?

      Who knows. Maybe they did, and no one could get there in time. I came across and tuned into the drunk driving chick while she was doing her thing, and several people did contact the police, eventually guiding them to her based on streets and landmarks. I also watched while a suicidal guy in Texas drove around threatening to shoot up Wal-Marts and several viewers were keeping the county sheriff updated as to his whereabouts. They sent a chopper up to find him eventually, at least an hour into his escapade, then he holed up inside his truck occasionally speaking to officers while threatening suicide; I had to give up listening to the scanner and go to sleep before I learned the outcome of that one.

      In both of these cases, even with people calling police, it took awhile to get authorities to the correct place because the vast majority of the people watching didn't live anywhere nearby, weren't familiar with the area, weren't necessarily sure how to contact law enforcement there (or where "there" even was), etc. If you tune into a live stream and you see a lady standing in front of some train tracks, what exactly are you going to do? It's not like her GPS coordinates are embedded in the video stream.

      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    5. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spot on.

    6. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She should have bought a firearm and used that instead of inconveniencing a lot of people who were traveling.

    7. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by daid303 · · Score: 1

      You do know that every single attempted suicide survivor regrets his/her decision?

      Or, if you do not like the human angle, pick one:
      a) Yes, society invested in this person, and you want the highest return on investment.
      b) Do not kill yourself by causing a shitload of damage to society. The train conductor now has been traumatized. And the train is delayed. Both causing economic damage to society.

      No, you are not free to do whatever the fuck you want. Because a lot of things you do influence other people as well. You litter? That means someone needs to clean that up, and we all need to pay for that someone. And thus, you should not litter.

    8. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You litter? That means someone needs to clean that up, and we all need to pay for that someone. And thus, you should not litter.

      You could make the case that paying someone to clean it up is cheaper than all of us taking the extra time to put our trash in the bin. You'd be wrong in the general case, but there is cases where this applies like eating at a foodhall (where it's expected someone will clean up your dishes, and it's absorbed into the cost of your meal), or cleaning up after a meal during overtime, where it's more efficient to have the CEO stay behind and clean up while the sysops get back to fixing whatever emergency/expansion caused the overtime. Likewise you could all go out and get dinner, but it's far more efficient to send the CEO out to get food for everyone, and clean up when they're done.

    9. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by blackomegax · · Score: 1

      hey at least if I litter, i'm creating a job for that person.

    10. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >You do know that every single attempted suicide survivor regrets his/her decision?

      The biggest regret in my life, is that my suicide attempts failed. My regret is that I was found before the medications had a chance to do their thing.

      There really is no point in my living. Death would be a welcome change of state.

      Treatment? That's a joke.
      70% of the people on a suicide watch, in an institution designed to prevent people from killing themselves, make at least one unsuccessful attempt. 30% of that population makes a successful attempt. Success is defined as "died as a result of the attempt".

      The only form of treatment that makes sense, is to have a mandate that any individual requesting PAS, be granted it immediately. Answers to questions as to why are not required. Go to ER. Request PAS. Send the body to the morgue.

    11. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that every single attempted suicide survivor regrets his/her decision?

      I think suicide and "attempted suicide" are distinct behaviors. Physically, human beings aren't terribly robust, and death can occur from many different systems failures. That is to say, if one truly wants "out", there is no shortage of methods that offer nearly 100% success rates, and from which no EMS team will have any opportunity to revive you (jumping in front of a train, for example).

      Because we are such fragile creatures, the most difficult component of suicide is overcoming the psychological blocks against self harm. Those who unsuccessfully attempt suicide haven't really overcome those blocks, which is why they try to side-step them with less effective methods (pill overdose).

      My point is that you can't really draw any conclusions about the mental composition of someone who has killed themselves with data from those that only attempt suicide.

    12. Re:Did anyone try to stop it? by twotacocombo · · Score: 1

      You do know that every single attempted suicide survivor regrets his/her decision?

      Or, if you do not like the human angle, pick one: a) Yes, society invested in this person, and you want the highest return on investment. b) Do not kill yourself by causing a shitload of damage to society. The train conductor now has been traumatized. And the train is delayed. Both causing economic damage to society.

      No, you are not free to do whatever the fuck you want. Because a lot of things you do influence other people as well. You litter? That means someone needs to clean that up, and we all need to pay for that someone. And thus, you should not litter.

      Really? So you've spoken with every single suicide "survivor"? Even those who went on to do it again, and eventually succeed? How about those who are terminally ill, in intense pain with no hope of recovery. Do you think those suicide "victims" would regret their decisions to try to end their lives, if they failed in their attempt? I agree that those who kill themselves in the heat of the moment, over some lost love or other repairable condition, are selfish and it's bullshit. But there are some people for whom life is just not at all enjoyable, spending years in mental or physical anguish, who value the end more than living in hell every day until they die of natural causes. Who are we to judge those peoples decisions? Have you ever been in that situation? If not, step aside, judgy judgerton.

      a) Really? You're trying to boil a persons life down to a business transaction? A person doesn't owe society shit. Especially when that society isn't offering enough for this person to want to continue living.

      b) I agree with this one. Traumatizing others with your exit plan is not acceptable. But people who are in such a frame of mind that today is the day to end it, aren't exactly thinking clearly. When there is no tomorrow, consequences don't exist. It's unfortunate, but there's really no easy way to address this; by design, there's nobody left to punish.

      We aren't talking about littering or carjacking or genocide here. We're talking about someone ending their life if they choose to, which everyone should be able to do if that's their desire. Other than the point above about harming others on your way out, what you do with your body should be your own business.

  8. So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by ffkom · · Score: 2

    Should 99,999% non-suicidal people in the population be restricted in their freedom just because the tiny rest could put themselves on camera when ending their lifes? Certainly not! Also, to me it's perfectly fine when adult people decide to end their life voluntarily, it's their life, not anyone elses. If (Futurama-style) suicide booths were available, railway commuters would not need to suffer from delays just because others don't find a more reliable method to kill themselves.

    1. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Heh... I don't know what to say but I'm compelled to say something. I'm actually sitting here pondering the words to write, for another email, as I'm a huge fan of PAS (physician assisted suicide) and the right to end one's life with dignity.

      My email is likely not to be completed but involves my not returning and running for State Senate - as I've hinted in the past. Reason is, it has come to pass, that I've a sibling who is going to simply stop using her TPN and enter hospice care. It's not easy to cope with but a decision that you accept and respect. One might even say that it takes greater courage. The expected date of refusal of care is the 1st of the month. It would appear that it can actually take quite a while. So, I'll need to be there. Meh, I hate politics anyways.

      Still, the gist is this and I'm not too articulate, we *do* need the right to end our lives with decency and dignity and damn the bastards that make it difficult. Heh... I've still ample time to change my mind (Maine is not, shall we say, a highly motivated State in some regards) but I'm quite likely to be a wreck for a while. Still, hard as it can be, one has to respect that choice and, indeed, admire that courage.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    2. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Heh... I don't know what to say but I'm compelled to say something. I'm actually sitting here pondering the words to write, for another email, as I'm a huge fan of PAS (physician assisted suicide)

      Well, don't choose to go too soon.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Nah, not me. If I did want to go then I'd like to have some dignity involved with it. I figure if I ever wanted to go then I'm a sucker for a giant shot of opiates. That's a pretty comfortable way to go, from what I've read. Nodding out in a warm fuzzy blanket? Yeah, that's better than lots of other ways.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    4. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Probably not, but at this young age the mimicry behavior can spread quickly ; thus the authorities want to give a much more dramatic touch - murder-ish - to the turn of events to possibly prevent any new trendy behavior pattern.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    5. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by Livius · · Score: 1

      If (Futurama-style) suicide booths were available, railway commuters would not need to suffer from delays

      No, people who want to take their life can do so quietly if they want to. The narcissistic ones are making a statement about how much pain they are in, and the drama and/or nuisance is part of that.

    6. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by yes-but-no · · Score: 1

      but why not just kill the mind and wander about like say hmmm a street dog?... what's wrong with that? killing the body is kid's stuff anyway. I mean if you've decided that you are fed up with life, why not just drift about.. and let death come n take you when it wants. That is, stop making efforts to maintain the body..whatever food/shelter/fun comes let it come.. kinda way.

    7. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      The giant shot of opiates very often is an option and is offered by medical professionals. It is usually stated as "More morphine won't help, should I give them more morphine?" or something along that line. Unfortunately at that point you are usually dealing with ending it a few hours earlier instead of days or weeks earlier. I have let my relatives know that if they are offered that option for me to take it.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    8. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by Whibla · · Score: 1

      I am sorry to hear that. I hope she passes quickly and without too much trauma to those involved.

      It is my firm belief that the first right we have, as a living being, is the right to end our own life. As a follow on I also believe we have the right to give others the (time limited) right to end our life - they are of course under no obligation to oblige our whims or wishes in this though - with no legal repercussions or consequences.

      I know a lot of people feel very uncomfortable even thinking about such things, let alone discussing them. I feel a bit sorry for them.

      Fortunately the situation is changing, albeit one-person-at-a-time slowly, and one day we will actually have sane laws regarding this incredibly emotive issue.

      Please pass on my regards and admiration to your sister, and my condolences to you.

    9. Re:So what? Want to forbid all live streaming? by ffkom · · Score: 1

      That's probably the case for some of them, and certainly for the few inclined to live-stream their suicide. But then there's a significant amount of people who neither have the means nor much knowledge on how to end their life quickly, and plenty of them choose the crude but known-to-work "death by railway". It might be different in the US, where guns are easy to obtain, so people can just shoot themselves. Where neither weapons nor narcotics are easily available, the "railway option" is actually one of the few widely known methods that people have easy access to. (Much fewer would be prepared to jump from a high roof or know how to fix an appropriate slipnot.)

  9. Inappropriate suicide? by bluescrn · · Score: 2

    Another young person comitted suicide. Meh, just a statistic. There's little sypmathy. People who have never had to deal with depression call them 'selfish'

    But a suicide streamed online... 'inappropriate content'... outrage! outrage! ban this sick filth!

    1. Re:Inappropriate suicide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Smoke pot, not meth, not pills, not booze, end of depression and you may still get into heaven yet whiskey woman. Repent ye sin after sin sinners.

    2. Re:Inappropriate suicide? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      The real danger is mimicry, other young people doing the same "trendy" thing..

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    3. Re:Inappropriate suicide? by Lotana · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I am quite surprised that this news piece was published. I thought that journalists have an unofficial standard to not report on suicide stories in order to prevent copycat suicides.

    4. Re:Inappropriate suicide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same reason so much else gets attention: "...only on the internet!"

    5. Re:Inappropriate suicide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing of value is lost when anyone so desperate to be trendy copies her.

    6. Re:Inappropriate suicide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to the rail commuters!

    7. Re:Inappropriate suicide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had to deal with depression (myself and friends), and not once did I consider anything this inconsiderate and attention-seeking, nor did any of my friends mention it. You can be depressed and not selfish; you just don't want to be a burden on anyone else anymore.

    8. Re:Inappropriate suicide? by ffkom · · Score: 1

      The times when journalists could decide what's getting published are over, for good. That's precisely what this story is about. Sure, you can ignore this story in your newspaper. But the video still can go viral on the InterNet or SneakerNet.

  10. Understand why they dont like this.. by thesupraman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the main problem here is that the powers that be, after spending a long long time growing fat and happy with the general addiction
    of the masses to mass media entertainment, are starting to get nervous about a slow transformation of that into consumer driven content
    and peoples acceptance of the messages there contained, which are not carefully filtered and cleaned by the powers that be.

    There is risk here, you see, of alternative points of view.

    The focus in this case should of course not be the streaming of this sad event, or finger pointing around that. It should be that a person
    was left in the situation where they could not reach out to other people for help, but instead did this. Now that is not something that can
    be easily changed - and rules, regulations, etc will not achieve it - there are always a few people that slip through cracks and end up in
    such a bad place internally that they will do something this bad - however we are not supposed to accept that. We are supposed to believe that
    if we follow the rules, and if we accept being controlled, monitored, then we will be SAFE from such things.

    Events like this remind us that that is simply not true. No matter how much control we give up, no matter how many rules we accept, and
    no matter how closely we are watched 'for our own good', bad things will and do happen. People make mistakes and are fallible.

    Hence, they do NOT want such things to be made public.

    1. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up - who gives a fuck if it was streamed or who watched it? Who in the hell knew this woman and *let it happen*?

    2. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the alternative "If you keep your nose to the grindstone, don't rock the boat, be happy with bread and circus and don't question authority, then there is a very, very slim chance that you might be able to claw yourself slightly ahead by standing on the head of the peon beside you" is so far to the right it makes most people puke.

    3. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We are supposed to believe that if we follow the rules, and if we accept being controlled, monitored, then we will be SAFE from such things.

      This sentence embodies the pathetic nature of the progressive left.

      I consider myself both "progressive" and "left" and this is not at all what I believe, nor is it anything even remotely close to what I believe.

      Maybe you should stop painting with such a broad brush, because neither I nor any of the left-leaning people I know would agree with this bullshit statement.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    4. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      On that matter does anyone have a write up on the events that led to this? It sounds as if there were more than a few missteps along the way. Also I don't feel periscope as a service has much of any responsibility for it.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    5. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your reply embodies the pathetic AND ignorant nature of the defenders of the established powers

    6. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Of course you don't agree with the label of Nanny State followers, but how you vote supports it. The politicians you vote into office push for laws that continue to monitor and attempt to control us under the guise of safety.

      Don't think we don't realize the religious right also wants to keep us safe from ourselves as well because they are just as bad as the progressive left.

      Both sides need to fuck off about the controls because people are going to do what they are going to do regardless of what some law says.

    7. Re: Understand why they dont like this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you don't really have any choice. Enjoy the bread and circuses as long as you can because they won't last forever. And don't even think about rebellion: any attempt would and will be put down promptly and violently.

    8. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fail to see how an example of someone doing what they wanted against the states wishes; is proof that more state surveilance will not lead to greater physical safety.

      Basically, This whole story is not an argument against state surveilance.
      Conversely it isn't an argument FOR state surveilance - but no one is claiming it is - not even this comment.

      So your need to paint this as a political anything is entirely invented by you.

    9. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Tom · · Score: 1

      It should be that a person
      was left in the situation where they could not reach out to other people for help, but instead did this.

      You have a thousand people who follow you live and nobody to reach out to? Seriously? If you can kill yourself you can't say "guys, here is something fucked up and I don't know how to handle it, if anyone knows, post me a comment, please" ?

      Now, I accept that people in crisis do not (can not) act rationally, but it does make me question the purpose of the whole attention whoring thing that people do with the Internet, if it doesn't give you anything when you need other people most.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    10. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by MancunianMaskMan · · Score: 1

      .. bad things will and do happen. People make mistakes ...

      I detect a bias towards condemning the person's actions. If the suicide was someone's decision who are we to say it's a "mistake"? Admittedly streaming it on Periscope may be considered in poor taste by others, but hey, it's Periscope, you have been warned.

    11. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but if you don't let him use a straw man then he's got nothing. No fair.

    12. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      ...and yet, there are many, many people who label themselves as you are and want to control everyone. I think maybe you don't expose yourself to a wide enough range of opinions. Leftists are the worst at wanting to control others, because they are convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are sincerely doing it for the victim's own benefit. Seriously, you need to discover just how horrifying your movement looks from the outside. Try an experiment: adopt a psudeonym, and start stating non-controversial middle-of-the-road American political opinions on your usual websites. You'll see what I mean quite quickly.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Shortguy881 · · Score: 1

      You don't believe that suicide is wrong and should be illegal? You don't believe there should have been some sort of support system in place for this woman to get help? If you answered no to these two questions you probably are not a progressive leftist.

      --
      Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
    14. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Leftists are the worst at wanting to control others, because they are convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are sincerely doing it for the victim's own benefit.

      I'd like some of whatever medication you're taking, but in a smaller dose.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    15. Re: Understand why they dont like this.. by johnsnails · · Score: 1

      I'm a conservative (what ever that means in Australia) and I thought the same thing, none of my leftest friends think like that at all.

    16. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      You don't believe that suicide is wrong and should be illegal? You don't believe there should have been some sort of support system in place for this woman to get help?

      I don't believe that suicide is wrong, depending on your definition of "wrong", and I don't think it should be illegal. I know hundreds, if not thousands of liberals and conservatives and none of them that I'm aware of think that suicide should be illegal.

      Should there have been some sort of resources available for this woman to get help if she wanted it? Sure, I see nothing wrong with making something like that available to those who want it (and there are in fact probably some already existing resources she could have used if she wanted to).

      -

      If you answered no to these two questions you probably are not a progressive leftist.

      Oh please, not this "no true Scotsman" fallacy bullshit again. Again, I consider myself both "progressive" and "left" and this is not even remotely close to what I believe. It's like you're pointing to something blue and crying "It's not blue enough for me to say it's blue!"

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    17. Re: Understand why they dont like this.. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      I'm a conservative (what ever that means in Australia) and I thought the same thing, none of my leftest friends think like that at all.

      I hear you. I know lots of people across the social and political spectrum and no one, literally no one I've ever spoken with about this thinks that suicide should be illegal. I'd like to find one so I could ask them, "Why? Why should suicide be illegal? And what should the penalty be?"

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    18. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Shortguy881 · · Score: 1

      Well you replied yes to the second question and thus are likely a progressive leftist, so that fits neatly into both of our points.

      --
      Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
    19. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't believe that suicide is wrong and should be illegal?

      Suicide is neither wrong nor right, in itself (context matters).... and it IS (wrongly) illegal, in most places. So, my answer is "no" here.

      You don't believe there should have been some sort of support system in place for this woman to get help?

      Of course there should be, this is a non-question. So, my answer is "yes" here.

      Given my answers, in which little ideological box do you want to place me in?

    20. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Well you replied yes to the second question and thus are likely a progressive leftist, so that fits neatly into both of our points.

      Yeah, well, basically the problem here is that lots of people don't fit neatly into whatever you imagine a "progressive leftist" is, so you're left to try and contort the meaning to match however you currently define it.

      It ain't that simple.

      You seem to have conveniently overlooked the fact that I answered "no" to your first question. OMG does that mean I'm not a "progressive leftist" after all?

      Finally, thinking that there ought to be some sort of support services for mentally ill or distraught people does not equate to being a "progressive" or a "leftist". You're simplifying things to the point of silliness. Lots and LOTS of "conservatives" would be just fine with the idea of support services being available for suicidal people.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    21. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Shortguy881 · · Score: 1

      I said if you said no to both, not either or. And if you had said no to both, you would have been a pretty bad "progressive leftest." Regardless of whether or not some conservatives agree with you, the idea of having social programs and laws targeting the less fortunate, is a progressive leftist ideology. But, you answered in the affirmative, so it's really a non-issue.

      Not to further the argument, but you labeled yourself "progressive left" and thus generalized your own ideologies. I only asked those questions to clarify your stance, for my benefit.

      --
      Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
    22. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Not to further the argument, but you labeled yourself "progressive left" and thus generalized your own ideologies. I only asked those questions to clarify your stance, for my benefit.

      That's why I said it's not that simple. Some people I know (most) would consider me "left", while some others (not many) would label me as borderline conservative. It all depends on how well they think I line up with their definitions and ideology and what topic is under discussion.

      One man's liberal is another man's socialist, and a third man's conservative. It's often relative depending on where the definer is on that spectrum. Hell, I've been labeled a "fascist" by more than a few people in my life because I didn't march in lockstep with their notions of right and wrong.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    23. Re: Understand why they dont like this.. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      The penalty should be resurrection and being made immortal!

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    24. Re: Understand why they dont like this.. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      The penalty should be resurrection and being made immortal!

      That's sick and devious. I like the way you think.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    25. Re: Understand why they dont like this.. by imidan · · Score: 1

      Why? Why should suicide be illegal?

      In the past, when I have asked this question, the answer has been that suicide is illegal because attempting suicide and failing gives authorities the ability to intervene and provide a person with mental health care. I understand that most people who fail at suicide wind up being glad they failed, so perhaps this intervention is appropriate. I'm not entirely convinced, but I'm willing to entertain the notion.

      I certainly believe that people should have the right to end their own lives, for whatever reasons they wish. But if the reason is a treatable mental illness, then I'd rather that they get treatment than die based upon their incorrect assessment of their future quality of life.

    26. Re:Understand why they dont like this.. by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Whether suicide is wrong or not should have little to do with whether it's illegal.

  11. Re:At very least the ad revenue should go to the g by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't tell if you're joking or not, but just in case, no it should not.
    The government has nothing to do with this, and they should stay out.

  12. They have control over filming at railway station by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 0

    They have control over filming at railway station.

    In usa after 9/11 think they added laws say that we can control / ban filming at any public transportation location

  13. 'Inappropriate Content' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which is more Inappropriate? That she broadcasted this horrific selfish act, or that presumably, the reason behind her act, failed justice, is being spotlighted in a VERY attention grabbing manner?

    All I can say is, pity the person who sees that as the only way out. Pity the society that would let her plight come to that.

    1. Re:'Inappropriate Content' by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      I don't dont know what article you read but everything ive found has been sparse on information. I don't have any idea her reasoning behind it failed justice is implied but not enough information was given to reach that conclusion.

      Spotlighted? They are just after a story but maybe if there had been some coverage of whatever happend before all this this wouldn't have happened?

      Inappropriate sure but without realtime monitoring and a significant added delay only so much can be done and its not cost effective.

      Well its France I had assumed that they had better mental healthcare than we do here in the US but that may not be the case. How many seperate parts of the system failed for this to happen?

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  14. Re:They have control over filming at railway stati by Calydor · · Score: 1

    Yes, that will definitely make someone decide NOT to publicly broadcast their own suicide.

    --
    -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
  15. Re:They have control over filming at railway stati by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Laws don't embue "them" with omniscience or absolute control over events. "They" clearly don't have "control" over filming at railway stations.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  16. It's Funny. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Laugh.

  17. Re:They have control over filming at railway stati by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I modded you down with "Troll".

    But only because "Idiot" isn't an option.

  18. Re:At very least the ad revenue should go to the g by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

    dead person owns the copyright for at least 70 years

  19. Re:They have control over filming at railway stati by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

    In usa after 9/11 think they added laws say that we can control / ban filming at any public transportation location

    They haven't. For instance, from the TSA's own FAQ:

    Can I film and take photos at a security checkpoint?

    TSA does not prohibit photographing, videotaping or filming at security checkpoints, as long as the screening process is not interfered with or sensitive information is not revealed. [...]

  20. Damn, I missed it! by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    Can I get some more advance notice next time?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  21. IT's a brave new world by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    Welcome to the inevitable result of the selfie generation and their obsession with broadcasting every detail of their life over the internet! Personally, I don't think she actually "threw herself in front of a train", I think she was just too distracted by her periscope feed to notice she was standing in front of a frickin' train!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  22. Re:They have control over filming at railway stati by ShooterNeo · · Score: 1

    Sure. IF a guard on duty spots it. Out of the millions of people daily passing through a railway network in a major city. Not to mention, someone selfie videoing with their phone is both incredibly common behavior and not really want the filming ban means. The guards would probably stop someone who showed up with professional movie cameras, a lighting and sound crew, the whole 9 yards...again, IF they saw it. Some of these stations may not have any guards on duty.

    The real "fix" is to eliminate these open platforms entirely. Separate the people on the platform from the moving trains with plexiglass and automatic doors that only open if the train is present and stopped. This won't stop suicides but should stop shoving murders and accidents.

  23. law, respect for others ... by swell · · Score: 0

    "prosecutors ... confirmed they had opened the inquiry"

    Who will they prosecute? What will the charges be? Who will pay for the waste of resources?

    From TFA: "the young woman claimed to have been raped and named her attacker, according to the reports." Had she reported that to the prosecutors? Perhaps they will investigate themselves if they didn't act on that information.

    I've heard that suicide is illegal in some places but I've never understood how it would be penalized. I think that there should be some options for suicidal people to expedite their death in a way that is painless and that does not make a big mess for others to clean up.

    As far as pre-announcing a suicide and recording it; of course good judgement should be employed so that unnecessary suffering isn't imposed on others.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:law, respect for others ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      she has reported it to the prosecutors. a dying declaration. look it up sometime.
      god the idiots have taken over /. and critical thinking be damned.

    2. Re: law, respect for others ... by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1

      I've heard that suicide is illegal in some places but I've never understood how it would be penalized.

      It's not difficult. If the cops get a tip that you're going to murder Mr. X at 5:00 when he leaves his office, they can show up to his office at 4:45 and arrest you when you show up with a gun. Right?

      With law enforcement intervention in suicide, it's the same thing, except you are Mr. X.

      As far as the "penalty" for attempted suicide, the idea is that they get you into a mental hospital so you can get treatment for your suicidal tendencies. They can't commit you to a mental hospital involuntarily unless you committed a crime, thus, suicide is illegal.

  24. Inappropritate content... by TheCreeep · · Score: 2
    From TFA:

    It is not the first time that Periscope has been linked to inappropriate content.

    Well it's not the first time Humans have been linked to inappropriate content.

  25. Fuck off, Government. by bretts · · Score: 1

    People kill themselves. They do so in public sometimes. This includes online, which is part of the public. Go back to stealing taxes and writing stupid reports; this is a problem without a solution, or a solution in search of a problem.

  26. plot twist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the rapist works for periscope...?

  27. dumb bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Raped so you commit suicide instead of homicide...you are a dumb bitch and should throw yourself under a train...oh you already did. Ha!

  28. Re:At very least the ad revenue should go to the g by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    So the government has no part in cleaning up the mess, repairing their train, investigating the rape accusation? You have some off definitions, I am sure the government should just stay out of these things though...

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?