rigorousintuition.ca

He was well invested in real estate, owning at least one 35-unit apartment building among his other holdings and according to his brother, became rich and also helped him and his mother to become wealthy. At least that's what been reported.

As has been pointed out, the story of a million a night at video poker and comes out ahead for years is more than highly improbable. The reported lifestyle doesn't prove but fits spook activity, however. Or maybe just straight mob, if there's a difference.

Counter to the money laundering hypothesis, it does seem—for whatever it's worth—that Paddock was addicted to video poker.

Check out the "Mores" sandwiched into the story. Does USA Today always do that?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2017/10/05/youtube-alters-algorithm-after-searches-las-vegas-shooting-turn-up-conspiracy-theories/736548001/

YouTube alters algorithm after searches for Las Vegas shooting turn up conspiracy theories

Jessica Guynn, USA TODAY Published 4:09 p.m. ET Oct. 5, 2017 | Updated 4:33 p.m. ET Oct. 5, 2017


SAN FRANCISCO — YouTube has changed its powerful search algorithm to promote videos from more mainstream news outlets in search results after people looking for details on the Las Vegas shooting were served up conspiracy theories and misinformation.

YouTube confirmed the changes Thursday. It didn't say how it decides which news sources are authoritative.

In the days after the mass shooting, videos abounded on YouTube, some questioning whether the shooting occurred and others claiming law enforcement officials had deceived the public about what really happened.

Searching for "Las Vegas shooting" on YouTube led many people to these videos, some of which claimed it was a "false flag," a term conspiracy theorists use to refer to mass shootings they believe were staged by the government to promote gun control.

Law enforcement officials say Las Vegas gunman Stephen Paddock acted alone, opening fire Sunday from the 32-second floor of the hotel. The attack killed 58 people and injured nearly 500. Paddock shot and killed himself as police tried to break into the room.

Jake Morphonios, who runs the End Times News Report, championed the theory of a second shooter on the fourth floor of the Mandalay Bay casino. He says he presented a "fact-based analysis of the evidence" and insists "there is nothing offensive in my videos." But Morphonios says he received a strike from YouTube for violating its community standards. YouTube takes down accounts that get three strikes in three months.

As a result, Morphonios told YouTube viewers he deleted all of the Las Vegas videos.

"I hated to do it, but if I get any more strikes, my entire channel is going to be deleted," he said in a video explaining the decision.


More: Portrait of a killer: Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock remains an enigma to police

More: Las Vegas shooting: Answering 4 common questions

More: We don't know Stephen Paddock's motive. Does it matter?

More: Vegas killer's girlfriend: He was 'a kind, quiet caring man'


Public outcry over YouTube videos promoting conspiracy theories is just the latest online flap for the major U.S. Internet companies. Within hours of the attack, Facebook and Google were called out for promoting conspiracy theories, with one anonymous message board misidentifying the shooter and claiming he was an anti-Trump Democrat.

Paddock's motives still aren't clear. He was a retired accountant with a taste for high-stakes poker. His brother, Eric Paddock, said he wasn't aware of any religious or political affiliations.


More: Google search spread wrong info from 4chan on Las Vegas shooting suspect

More: Google looks for Russian meddling in election after Twitter slammed

More: Facebook political ads are coming out of the shadows — why you should care


This isn't the first time fringe content has plunged YouTube into controversy. Major brands pulled spending on YouTube earlier this year after reports surfaced that their ads were running next to extremist videos.

YouTube is one of the Internet's most popular destinations for video. People now watch more than 1 billion hours of videos a day on it.

Helping drive that popularity is the "Up next" column which suggests additional videos to viewers.

The Wall Street Journal found incidents this week in which YouTube suggested videos promoting conspiracy theories next to videos from mainstream news sources. YouTube acknowledged issues with the "Up next" algorithm and said it was looking to promote more authoritative results there, too.


More: Las Vegas survivors have been through hell. And it's not over.

minime » 10 Oct 2017 23:20 wrote:Cold wet October day, ashamed to say I read the whole thread, and most of the links...

and the thing that impresses me immediately (unfavorably for the most part) is that after a while I stopped looking at the posters' names before reading, and still I could tell who was posting.

What does it mean? It means that truth is not of value so much to the participants. Obviously I'm not talking about everyone, and not all the time. But pretty much. I'll leave you to sort that out. And that's on you. What else does it mean? It means that I've been here too long, to be sure. That I have had no noticeable beneficial effect. And that's on me.

It also means that most of you are not likely to make it out of here. Not that you even know what that means. No matter. Disheartening nevertheless.

Where is the rigorous intuition if the purpose consciously and unconsciously is to cherry pick the facts and distort the presentation to advance an obvious personal narrative to fulfill a personal agenda?

I certainly have an agenda, and I have clearly spelled out what my agenda is, which is to defend any individual summarily convicted of heinous acts in the court of social construction based on nary a single shred of tangible, credible evidence but solely the incredibly bad plot narratives and character assassinations spewed forth by confirmed unremitting liars.

I also used to stand up for the little kids who were picked on by bullies in my formative years, so I suppose my agenda could be characterized as personal. But I would prefer to think that I am merely conveying a disturbingly unique perspective sadly missing among my eleven fellow angry men. That you somehow managed to discern the sound of my little Who voice in noise of the madding crowd humbles me.


edited to insert a missing word

stillrobertpaulsen » Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:45 pm wrote:

Burnt Hill » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:21 pm wrote:

stillrobertpaulsen » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:27 pm wrote:Looks like Daniel Hopsicker is interested in this. He just posted this video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XuXNtV7-8U

And wrote:

There are a lot of unanswered questions in the Las Vegas massacre. But if this one doesn't get addressed, there needs to be a sit-in at NBC.

Well the end is always near.

This has a lot more credibility if the woman was really with someone else, though only the woman got taken away?.

The eyewitness being interviewed gives a pretty detailed description of both the woman who was "messing with the other lady" and subsequently escorted out by security and her boyfriend. Presumably, her boyfriend left with her, though that is not clear from the interview.

Burnt Hill » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:21 pm wrote:Not clear if this was a completely first hand account of the situation though.

What is not clear to you? The woman being interviewed is describing what she witnessed prior to the shooting. She said this woman escorted out by security 45 minutes prior to the shooting "told us we were all going to die." The woman being interviewed seems pretty shaken, even though she admits that her group left 10 to 15 minutes before the shooting started. This is because she "thought it had a positive correlation" - that either they were being warned or being taunted by someone with foreknowledge.

Burnt Hill » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:21 pm wrote:And eye witnesses are notoriously unreliable, as already known.

As a blanket statement, that's really un-RI to be that dismissive. True, in a court of law this would be considered hear-say. So would Sandra Serrano's testimony about the polka-dot dress lady saying, "We shot him!" regarding the assassination of RFK, yet that didn't stop the LAPD from doing their utmost to make her look unreliable. As a court of public opinion, I think this discussion board needs to look deeper at these sorts of strange contradictions to whatever official story the authorities and media are trying to spread.

I don't know that the girl being interviewed is offering a complete first hand account,
I wonder if she is not also offering info she got from her sister,
and her group when they got together after the event.
Calling attention to the unreliability of eye witnesses is not dismissive, its a fact.
Offer her testimony as much value as you like, I more need corroborating info.
Info on her - the woman escorted out - companion is sketchy
Of course ~ look deeper!
I look forward to more from Hopsicker.

IanEye » 11 Oct 2017 01:36 wrote:Who is more affluent:
your parents, or Adam Lanza's parents?

Who generally feels that they have more power in our society, young people with mental disabilities who blame their misery on society or successful, established adults?

Who is more likely to go on a murderous rampage against strangers, someone who just shot his mother four times, or someone who had no discernible reason to murder a completely unknown stranger when he pulls the trigger for the first time, ensuring his own imminent demise?

Searching for "Las Vegas shooting" on YouTube led many people to these videos, some of which claimed it was a "false flag," a term conspiracy theorists use to refer to mass shootings they believe were staged by the government to promote gun control.

Gee, and here I thought it was all about Strategy of Tension, insider trading/short selling, terrorizing the populace with the murderous unpredictability of dark people and/or lone nuts (requiring increased surveillance and policing, and increased spending on the both the hardware and software to support/enable this). Gun control, though, makes a lot of sense!

But the rich and famous kill for the very same reasons others do: love, power, money, jealousy, greed, revenge, and rage.

None of which apply one iota to mass shooters who craft elaborate plans to murder complete strangers and only complete strangers for no reason and then off themselves as well also for no reason.

Hmmm, could this be why this has happened just a handful of times in all of human history?

JackRiddler » 11 Oct 2017 02:36 wrote:So what is a stickdog, is that like a strawman? That would make sense, if so.

You seem to be confused. True, I have not nodded affirmatively to every one of your often ill-founded speculations. This is not the same as believing whatever the authorities say. Tough shit. And "skepticism" is not the same as assuming (and insisting on) the exact opposite of what they say. (It also doesn't put me in that special box for normals that only the highly enlightened minime seems to have escaped.) You want your privileged status, you could stand to earn it by employing the occasional logic and circumspection. Now, if you want to back off from your condescension and totally unwarranted arrogance, this thread might turn away from Jonestown shock videos and consider some of the genuine open source information on this case.

This conversation seems to be returning to the evidence of a very spooky background for Paddock. I always found that interesting, from the first night. I suspect if you go back to the start of this thread you'll find I was either the first or among the first to point it out. This is something we can actually look into. (Sorry that we don't get inside the Vegas evidence room or the crime scene(s) or you might be able to actually assess how many of your wild guesses and sheer fantasies might have a basis. But Paddock's life, that's relatively available.)

I'll stop this tone if you do, by the way.

I appreciate the excellent meditations on the video poker odds. Where is all that money coming from and why doesn't it ever run out? That is fucking interesting, no? Your decision if you want to consider it or roll out more empty insults.

Sorry, JR. I was just shit talking with an old, old friend whom I suddenly recognized. Yeah, I can be a prick when I start to feel that I'm engaging in asymmetric warfare. But I'm still me, and I'm happy to see that you are still you.

Cheers!

Project Willow » Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:30 pm wrote:Common among mass shooters is that they perceive that they have failed at achieving manhood as defined in this society, and they blame it on other people. I can think of at least two who targeted women because as men they felt entitled to sex, and thought they were being thwarted either by feminists or just women in general. For others, especially of the workplace going postal variety, they are unable to assert themselves to improve their social and economic standing, they feel weak as men and blame it on others.

The common denominator here is power, presumptions about power that accrues to men as part of manhood. Wealth enables men to exercise a great deal of power, it is a signifier of success, significantly reducing the pool of possible motivations based in perceptions of failed manhood common to other mass shooters.

I hope that makes sense.

This is really well put, I agree completely. Wealth reduces the pool of possible motivations, but not to zero. I still think that the two failed marriages, and the relationship with a much less well-off and thus financially dependent woman he met when she was in a relationship of subservience to him, are reasons to think Paddock had issues with masculinity. I think the fact that he liked Asian girls is relevant as well - a lot of Western men with the hangups Willow describes think Asian women are meeker and more traditional. And Danley or that other friend of his saying afterwards he was a sweetie pie doesn't change that. I have a friend who's impotent and we only found out recently, like having known him for 15 years. The nicest guy, we could never work out why his relationships were such disasters. Until it all made sense (and it was only his very last girlfriend who spoke out about it).

Anyway it's not like I'm married to the idea of Paddock being the shooter - I don't think he operated alone, and I think his strange background, and the cops' lying about everything, are related and relevant. I just felt like arguing against the false idea that the rich can't have issues, and the logical fallacy of 'someone exactly like P in these ways has never done this, therefore P did not do this'

Another fallacy that seems to be going around is 'the cops are lying, therefore P is an innocent patsy'. What if they're lying because he's guilty in a way that involves spooks? That's what I think is going on, and why, as Mac says, the Vegas cops and the FBI aren't on the same page.

Also glaring by its absence: any mention of a phone found in the room, or even the information that no phone was found in the room. I imagine his last phone calls had to do with the reasons for his death.

Hullo! RT so salt to taste

Break-in at Las Vegas shooter’s home in Reno confounds police
Published time: 11 Oct, 2017 03:39

FBI agents returned to search a house in Reno owned by Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock after local police told them that someone had broken into the home over the weekend.

Reno police officer Tim Broadway said they were called to the house Sunday morning by a neighbor who saw lights on in the home owned by Paddock.

“Nobody really saw anything, just a light was on with nobody in the residence,” Broadway said, according to the Associated Press.

Broadway said officers discovered that "someone had broken into the house” and he immediately contacted the FBI.

He added that the suspects broke into the home through the front door over the weekend, but said he was not sure exactly how they gained entry. Police are not aware of any damages or anything that was stolen.

There are no suspects at this time or any descriptions of a suspect.

The FBI is working with Reno police to ensure “there are no further incidents,” Broadway told the Reno-Gazette Journal.

Paddock, 64, bought the house in the upscale retirement community in 2013 and lived there with his girlfriend, Marilou Danley.

Investigators previously searched the residence on October 3 and found five handguns, two shotguns, numerous electronic devices and a “plethora of ammunition,” according to KOLO.

During a news conference Monday, Las Vegas Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said the FBI and behavioral analysis agents were revisiting Paddock’s properties in order to possibly “discern additional evidence.”

stefano » 11 Oct 2017 07:29 wrote:

Project Willow » Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:30 pm wrote:Common among mass shooters is that they perceive that they have failed at achieving manhood as defined in this society, and they blame it on other people. I can think of at least two who targeted women because as men they felt entitled to sex, and thought they were being thwarted either by feminists or just women in general. For others, especially of the workplace going postal variety, they are unable to assert themselves to improve their social and economic standing, they feel weak as men and blame it on others.

The common denominator here is power, presumptions about power that accrues to men as part of manhood. Wealth enables men to exercise a great deal of power, it is a signifier of success, significantly reducing the pool of possible motivations based in perceptions of failed manhood common to other mass shooters.

I hope that makes sense.

This is really well put, I agree completely. Wealth reduces the pool of possible motivations, but not to zero. I still think that the two failed marriages, and the relationship with a much less well-off and thus financially dependent woman he met when she was in a relationship of subservience to him, are reasons to think Paddock had issues with masculinity. I think the fact that he liked Asian girls is relevant as well - a lot of Western men with the hangups Willow describes think Asian women are meeker and more traditional. And Danley or that other friend of his saying afterwards he was a sweetie pie doesn't change that. I have a friend who's impotent and we only found out recently, like having known him for 15 years. The nicest guy, we could never work out why his relationships were such disasters. Until it all made sense (and it was only his very last girlfriend who spoke out about it).

Anyway it's not like I'm married to the idea of Paddock being the shooter - I don't think he operated alone, and I think his strange background, and the cops' lying about everything, are related and relevant. I just felt like arguing against the false idea that the rich can't have issues, and the logical fallacy of 'someone exactly like P in these ways has never done this, therefore P did not do this'

Another fallacy that seems to be going around is 'the cops are lying, therefore P is an innocent patsy'. What if they're lying because he's guilty in a way that involves spooks? That's what I think is going on, and why, as Mac says, the Vegas cops and the FBI aren't on the same page.

How many jails would we need to build if people could be convicted of senseless mass murder based on their failed romantic relationships?

Once again, I am not exonerating Paddock of any and all involvement in these murders. I am simply taking issue with the utter logical fallacy that the most probable explanation is to believe confirmed habitual liars that a guy with absolutely no fathomable reason to commit suicide, much less to devise an elaborate plan to murder dozens of total strangers for no reason before committing suicide, expertly executed an elaborate plan to murder dozens of total strangers for no reason before committing suicide.

I am just trying every possible approach I can possibly devise to snap us out of the availability heuristic we have been hypnotized by.

Paddock did something that to date has fortunately occurred in just an infinitesimally tiny number of wholly exceptional cases.

To reiterate, there have been fewer than 10 total cases in all of US history in which anyone killed several total strangers (and only total strangers) and then committed suicide after careful premeditation. Unless we are watching a Hollywood movie, people simply do not make and then execute careful plans to shoot and kill numerous total strangers (and only total strangers) and then themselves, That we have somehow have come to consider such incredibly improbable behavior both credible and probable is clearly the result of the availability heuristic and the influence of Hollywood fiction.

The fact that Paddock was a US citizen over 55 who supposedly shot more than 5 people in one day puts him in a class all by himself. The fact that Paddock that was a millionaire who supposedly shot multiple strangers in one day puts him in a class by himself. But the real reason why Paddock's supposed actions are so far-fetched is that they were carefully premeditated, they involved only complete strangers, they ended in unforced suicide, and they were not triggered by any known mental illness or personal distress.

Now we can of course invent all sorts of possible make-believe motivations for his supposed actions, but unless he was coerced into them, all of these make-believe motivations will apply in reality to millions of people who somehow, like 99.99999% of us, managed to avoid turning into premeditated suicidal multiple stranger only shooters. And the only reason we have to believe that a seemingly normal 64 year old millionaire turned into a premeditated suicidal multiple stranger only shooter is that some habitual liars told us so and their exact motivation for spinning yet another such whopper is not quite as patently obvious as usual.

Again, I am not saying Paddock could not have done this. Anything is possible, there is a first time for everything that ever happens, and I am willing to be convinced by released evidence that this is indeed the first time something like this has ever happened. However, the relative likelihood of an event can be measured only by its past frequency, and at least to date, premeditated suicidal mass stranger only shooters are so rare as to be virtually nonexistent. Add to this the fact that our putative suspect was a rich, comfortable, cocky old guy with no history of mental health problems and no known financial or personal distress, and the odds that he did all of this completely of his own accord become negligibly slim. In other words, it's not fucking likely so stop thinking it is.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/com ... _hand_gun/

Don't think I can embed the video, but it shows the end of the firing spree and then, 30 seconds after the last rifle shot, a handgun shot, and another handgun shot another 10 seconds after that. On the official timeline, the SWAT team breached the door another hour later.