Hacker News Reader

Comment by IvyMike | Hacker News Reader

The one thing I hate about this: There are so-called "first amendment auditors", who professionally annoy people on the street, trying to provoke a reaction. They monetize the resulting video on youtube.

You used to be able to pull out your phone and play Disney soundtracks or Taylor Swift music which would result in the video being non-monetizable. But improvements in audio isolation techniques have now defeated this countermeasure. Being a professional annoyance is once again a career choice.

Edit: this is one instance I've personally seen: https://www.instagram.com/p/C7IEFxQSJQw/?hl=en&img_index=1

View on HN

I know the sorts of “creators” you’re talking about, but I’ve never heard of this as a response before.

Are there really that many people who 1) are aware that this could be effective, and 2) are quick witted enough to pull their phone out and play music in response to being harassed?

Yes, police do it, in fact: https://www.vice.com/en/article/z3n75x/police-disney-music-c...

A single police car did*

While 1st ammendment auditors are cringe, they only annoy police. This comment is definately pro LE coded and the irony does not escape me with its criticism of people expressing their 1st amendment (regardless of how annoying their method).

Perhaps we should demonitize every form of journalism and media that annoys this guy!

I'm not sure what videos you're watching, but the majority of the ones that pop up on my feeds are them annoying non-LE government workers and regular people trying to use government services like the post office, passport office, etc. Yes, the police show up eventually, but only after they've harassed people just trying to do their jobs and live their life.

Never seen anything but cops idk, I'll take your word for it. I also find it annoying and therefore rarely watch them as I choose not to watch things that annoy me. Not sure why y'all do.

The ones I've seen in person do not "only annoy police"; they may have been trying to provoke a police response, but they were just harassing normies on the street as well. Linking to the ones I've seen: https://www.instagram.com/p/C7IEFxQSJQw/?hl=en&img_index=1

You mean like "Billy on the Street"? Or something closer to the "comedy gang" from Viral Hit?

Can't really imagine why you would both give a response to an interview-style question, while being recorded, and simultaneously not want that response to be public. Or are they doing it secretly?

I added this to the original post, but here's the incident that I saw that made me aware of the whole scene: https://www.instagram.com/p/C7IEFxQSJQw/?hl=en&img_index=1

This technique relies on bizarrely over-powerful intellectual property infringement counter-measures built into youtube, the platform. Relying on it gives me serious XKCD spacebar-heater vibes. It wasn't designed for that.

Yes, people who are assholes in public are annoying. Shoplifting and bank robbing are probably also career choices. Don't rely on a side effect of "big copyright" systems to save us.

>You used to be able to pull out your phone and play Disney soundtracks or Taylor Swift music which would result in the video being non-monetizable. But improvements in audio isolation techniques have now defeated this countermeasure.

In my opinion, this is a bug, not a feature. If you pull out your phone and play Taylor Swift, you are in fact making a public performance without permission. Even if you had permission (as some cops allegedly do to use some bands music for this purpose), this is not the correct method to deal with professional annoyances.

As a police officer, your job is to be the adult in the room. Society is trusting you with a tremendous amount of power. If you can't handle some annoying whiny YouTubers professionally without using "countermeasures", you should hang up your badge and get another job.

Cops on HN!? Just a heads up, you have a choice not to watch and inadvertently reward people who annoy you on the internet.

Same with police and citizen videographers. Being a citizen reporter is once again an option.

> You used to be able to pull out your phone and play Disney soundtracks or Taylor Swift music which would result in the video being non-monetizable.

This is actually illegal for you to do.

Why not just sue the hell out of them? Would also break their business model really fast.

Because there's no legal basis to sue them.

Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. But they'd be forced to pay exorbitant fees to lawyers regardless.

If a judge finds that the lawsuit was frivolous then their exorbitant lawyer fees are now yours to pay.

>professionally annoy people on street

>Provoke a response

They mostly do it to cops and people in authority. It's their right to do so, they should be able to. They expose so many cops and authoritarians who blatantly do not respect citizens' civil rights. Good for them.

The fact that "oh no you're annoying me I'm going to arrest you because you're annoying" is even a talking point from you is baffling.

> They mostly do it to cops and people in authority.

In Santa Barbara there is a group that targets random businesses; random shops and restaurants with outdoor eating.

It sucks for the business, it sucks for their clients, it sucks for random people walking by on the street.

I'm all for limiting the unchecked authority we give police, we need to end qualified immunity, etc. But we should take the problem on directly. And I'm all for filming cops who abuse their privilege. But the reality I've seen in person is this is sucky.

> The fact that "oh no you're annoying me I'm going to arrest you because you're annoying" is even a talking point from you is baffling.

Who are you replying to? What did I say that's even close to this. Talk about baffling.

>Who are you replying to? What did I say that's even close to this. Talk about baffling.

Good point, I may have misread part of what you said.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com