Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

playhearthstone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

#891

Post by TeMPOraL »

MereInterest wrote: post #364
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've said it a few times, but it's worth repeating IMO: copyright is a deal, where a creator gets a time-limited monopoly in exchange for works entering the public domain. If a company have arranged things so their work can't enter the public domain (eg DRM) then they should not get copyright protection, fundamentally it's wrong to get the benefit of copyright without giving up your work to the public domain. This ca…

I'm glad to hear that others have the same opinion regarding software copyrights. I'd even go one step further and say that the source code must be included in that unhindered copy. Otherwise, the public's right to make derivative works from things in the public domain cannot be upheld.

The companies will say that they're still using parts of the old code in newer products covered by copyright, so this won't happen.

Besides, we'd have to have copyright periods on software of 3-5 years, 10 tops, for software copyright to even make sense. Not 70+, which is longer than any recognizable computer industry ever existed.

Re: Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

#892

Post by TeMPOraL »

lr4444lr wrote: post #143
SkyMarshal wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not clear what software has to do with this. It's happening across all industries, here's a good roundup of a bunch of other examples: https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/07/china-censorship-daryl-mo... Is software special in this case somehow?

Because software has this weird status where you increasingly don't own a perpetual use right to the copy of the code you bought, and can have it revoked for reasons that have nothing to do with the purchase agreement. What if one day in the not too distant the electrical system on your car stopped working because an auto software update from that vendor (not the company that sold you the car perhaps) detected your n…

Or see yesterday's executive order putting sanctions on subset of Venezuelan population, followed by Adobe suspending accounts of everyone in that country. Think of entire occupations affected by this. What if tomorrow the tools for your job disappeared because some people on the other side of the world have a disagreement with your government?

Re: Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

#893

Post by landryraccoon »

haberman wrote: post #887
landryraccoon wrote: post #851

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You really can't see how someone could believe China is 'marginalized'? I am not sure what you mean by marginal here. The fact that the NBA and Blizzard will apologize to China in a debased fashion is very strong evidence that China is in no way marginalized, but is actually in a position of incredible strength.

That is exactly what happens when people offend the groups considered "marginalized" in the USA. Here is Kevin Hart apologizing repeatedly for offending the LGBT community: https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/celebrity/kevin-hart-apo... Here is cyclist Jen Wagner-Assali apologizing for offending the trans community: https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/cycling-champion-apologizes-... Here are YA authors apologizing profus…

You're playing both sides here. You want to use the progressive definition of marginalized when you want something to attack, but you aren't willing to say that's what marginalized actually means.

Right now, by calling China marginalized, it sounds like you agree with the definition given by those examples without staking a claim on what the word really means.

I'm asking you point blank: Are these groups marginalized? What are you actually trying to say? I don't think China is marginalized, the definition of "marginalized" does not include a nuclear armed, economically ascendant global nation state with the ability to make multi national corporations and interest groups apologize at a whim.

Re: Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

#894

Post by adventured »

chimi wrote: post #863
monster2control wrote: post #837

Wow, when a government can ruin someone's professional career of choice simply because he or she has an opinion that goes against the People’s Republic, that’s when companies should decide to no longer do business in China. Sadly, however, the dollar is more powerful than the the moral high ground.

This wasn't the government's decision though, was it? It was Blizzard's decision. Just makes me wonder where all of this is going. Americans left and right are choosing China's cultural decisions over America's cultural ... legacy for the lack of a better word. Over money. It's like the Americans who love America, because America made them rich, are now loving China because China is richer. I don't know which is more…

> It's like the Americans who love America, because America made them rich, are now loving China because China is richer.

China isn't richer. That debunks the rest of your follow-on premise. China has less than half the household wealth of the US. The US has 35%-40% of all the world's millionaires and about 32%-34% of all the world's wealth (with just 4% of the population).

Fun fact of the day: Since any of the years 1990, 2000, 2005, 2010 (pre or post great recession) the US has produced more new household wealth than China has. Not an outcome very many people would expect. China went from $4 to $52 trillion in household wealth since the year 2000 and the US gain still exceeded that gain by another 1/3.

Since just 2007-2008 the US has added $42 trillion in new household wealth, and only added $1.7 trillion in new household debt. The greatest net positive household balance sheet expansion in world history. Americans have been busy boosting savings (~8% savings rate) and paying down their mortgages (share of homes without a mortgage at 15-20 year highs along with strong growth in household equity figures).

Re: Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

#896

Post by phs318u »

ew6082 wrote: post #889
phs318u wrote: post #879

I just went through the process to delete my account. First attempt to use my Authenticator was “denied - too many attempts. Try another method”. Tried using SMS auth, “denied - too many attempts. Try another method”. Uploaded my driver’s license. Irrespective of stance on China, for this behaviour alone Blizzard can go and get fucked. EDITED to correct spelling.

It needs to be that way. Deleting a MMO account or several thousand dollars worth of hearthstone collections should not be something a casual hacker can do with just your password.

I didn’t make myself clear. I have 2FA enabled and neither the authenticator nor the SMS verification was accepted. And yet I strangely had no problem logging into the game last time I played. I’m pretty sure they’re just creating hoops to dissuade casual leavers. #blexit

Re: Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

#898

Post by jcranberry »

ummonk wrote: post #639
wolrah wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a generic catch-all rule that means basically nothing. No one can determine ahead of time what is allowed and what's not under that rule. He didn't say anything "offensive" or "disreputable" to anyone other than authoritarian regimes, and if that's the standard Blizzard is going by they can fuck right off.

He didn't make some off-hand comment about Hong Kong. He made a deliberate political statement complete with props and all. That very obviously falls under the rule.

That would also imply essentially any kind of public figure who makes a strong political statement would not be allowed to play this game.

It looks to me that it was written with stuff more in line with white supremacy advocation and stuff like that in mind.

Re: Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

#899

Post by greycol »

closetohome wrote: post #786
alkonaut wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect companies to do what’s morally right not merely maximize profits while doing anything that is legally acceptable. I expect leaders of companies to do what’s morally right while explaining to shareholders that if they disagree they can sell their shares or replace them. I have zero respect for a manager at Blizzard or the NBA who decides to try to pull what they did this week.

Except in many cases they are legally required to maximize profits, regardless of ethics, so long as their actions are strictly legal.

It is part of our moral duty to punish a company for ignoring public good rather than excuse it as what a company must do. That's because if a company is punished financially (say by boycott) for making immoral decisions then they must follow a more moral course to maximize their profit.

Personally I don't think this is enough especially as companies become more pervasive and the confusion of subsidiaries which make it next to impossible to boycott the largest offenders, but that is fixed in the political sphere rather than the economic one.

I'd even expect the 'correct' long term 'required' choice for blizzard is to ignore any blow back and focus on the Chinese market. Still in this case shareholder focus being all about current quarter profits might help as company leadership might be more focused on keeping the shareholders happy than serving long term profit.

Re: Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

#900

Post by jdietrich »

monster2control wrote: post #837

Wow, when a government can ruin someone's professional career of choice simply because he or she has an opinion that goes against the People’s Republic, that’s when companies should decide to no longer do business in China. Sadly, however, the dollar is more powerful than the the moral high ground.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_C...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consulting_Association

Post reply on HN