Is the implication that if he wasn't a counter strike pro, or a goalkeeper for the nation futsal team, or that he built a BMW, or a programmer, that his life would have been worth less?
At the end of the day, his life is precious to him as much as anybody's life is to themself. And to the shooter he's just another 'invader'. I didn't know of him before and I honestly will forget in a week, maybe a faint memory as "that programmer guy who got killed in christchurch".
Why is he more important to write about than the other 49 who got snuffed out by the nationalist in his ideological war?
The point I am making is that war has and will always be part of human societies and therefore all technological progress will be applied to warfare. There's no point to complaining about potential use of new tech in war the same way that there's no point in complaining about the laws of physics.
All the open standards are still out there. Just because now there are 2 billions slaved to walled gardens doesn't mean all the good stuff disappeared. It just seems like everything is walled garden because the wall-to-unwalled ratio has decreased. IRC still exists, email still exists, just because whatsapp also exists and because a lot of people use it doesn't mean the web has gone down.
all your film cameras don't stop working when digital came out.