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

Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 412 posts

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#251

Post by celticmusic »

spathi_fwiffo wrote: post #197
celticmusic wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, "free speech" does not mean you can say anything you want without facing consequences from people who hired you or your friends. Blizzard hired player to play in tournament, and they can fire him if they want. There is nothing illegal in Blizzard's actions. The only ones that hold these sorts of views are the ones with nothing interesting to say.

>> Morally, though >The only ones that hold these sorts of views are the ones with nothing interesting to say. I'm confused by your response; what is it you are trying to say? They were making a legal description of why the 1st amendment doesn't prevent a private entity from censoring; not a moral one. From a legal perspective, they are right. The constitution prevents the government (and only the government) from re…

The biggest clue that you're involved in a strawman is your quoting a part of the other poster that I didn't quote and applying it to my response.

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#253

Post by carapace »

jessaustin wrote: post #179
carapace wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But aren't FIFA a bunch of morally bankrupt scam artists? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA#Corruption

Isn't that what GP said? Banning speech sure seems "morally bankrupt" to me...

You're right! Now that I think about it, my comment could have been a snarky joke. I didn't think it through. (^_^)

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#254

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #212
enraged_camel wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because most people don't understand that "freedom of speech" and "free speech", while related concepts, are actually different. Freedom of speech is what the US Constitution guarantees. It says the government cannot limit people's ability to speak their mind, and cannot punish people for speaking their mind. Note that it says nothing about what private entities can do, especially on platforms they own and ope…

I’m not referring to the concept that there shouldn’t be social repercussions for speech people find distasteful. Of course there should be—shaming and ostracism are powerful tools for enforcing morality, deeper and more fundamental than law. I’m talking about folks using “speech is violence” as a pretext for regulating speech through the government. (This tends to come to a head in the campus context, because when p…

Is this a phenomenon that occurs outside of college campuses?

(I assume you follow FIRE, and know that this problem isn't contained to the "speech is violence" people; there are numerous right-wing attempts at suppression on campus as well.)

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#255

Post by strombofulous »

Reedx wrote: post #173
BrandonMarc wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditto South Park. By telling people they cannot watch South Park, they have guaranteed everyone will want to watch that episode. That's the lesson Dolores Umbridge inadvertently taught us in Harry Potter # 5.

South Park Studios and Comedy Central are having a great week. I'd be surprised if it wasn't one of the biggest episodes in South Park history. And certainly the most viewed episode in China, haha.

Why do you believe people in China are watching this? Does south park usually have a lot of chinese viewers?

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#256

Post by nkurz »

Knove wrote: post #204
zanny wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> United States does not want to be talked about 911 As a US citizen, please talk about 9/11. The response Americans had in the wake of that tragedy is reprehensible - the entire country gave unanimous support to the government to commit war crimes in nations around the world - including our own. Torture, illegal detainment, wars founded on lies to make private contractors rich, expansive laws like the Patriot Act, N…

Maybe what I mean is not clear enough. I imagine that a star, just a few days after 9/11, openly declared that 9/11 was a great recovery movement.

I don't think people understand what you mean by "recovery moment". At least in American English, it's not a standard phrase. Personally, I've never heard it before. Maybe you could try an alternate phrasing?

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#257

Post by magashna »

puranjay wrote: post #237
Dumblydorr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blizzard has been on a downward spiral for years. They still have awesome teams releasing and maintaining awesome games, (thank you for custom colors in SC Remastered!), but by and large their direction has been towards EA and away from their true fans.

I can't understand why anyone even expects better PR management from Blizzard after that "you all have mobile phones, right?" fiasco

It's no longer Blizzard, it's Activision-Blizzard, which explains the clusterfuck that the company has become.

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#258

Post by buttman2077 »

macspoofing wrote: post #81
buttman2077 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations are citizens too! Alongside plenty of other benefits, I’d expect them to support American values.

Are you boycotting Chinese made products? What are you doing to 'support American values'? And which values? 2nd Amendment rights?

I’m not sure what my habits have to do with my expectations of US corporations. They sure don’t have any constitutional pressure to support our first, second, sixth, and other amendments, but nonetheless, I expect them to.

It doesn’t have to be so polarizing: if I make an effort to value our constitution, I expect at least the corporations that impact and influence our society to too. If I don’t like it, I start a dialogue to change it - but I certainly don’t censor or violate the rights of others.

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#259

Post by gamblor956 »

eberfreitas wrote: post #182

Real question: How is what China is doing any different from what we've seen the US do to Venezuela (the Adobe incident) or even Cuba for that matter?

The US issued sanctions against Venezuelan government officials known to be be corrupt; the sanctions don't apply to all, or even most, of Venezuela. Adobe simply used those sanctions as an excuse to cut off support for everyone in Venezuela so they could pull out without having to refund anyone.

Also, with respect to both countries, we aren't trying to use our US economic power to force a Venezuelan or Cuban company to do what we want.

The US government has made its stance toward both countries clear for the last several decades, it's not like they tricked US businesses into going into Venezuela or Cuba and then tried to pull the rug out from beneath them.

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#260

Post by rapsey »

heyyyouu wrote: post #35

What is really interesting about this is how completely and utterly horrible a job Blizzard did in anticipating and preparing this very obvious possibility, and thus is so poorly handling every single aspect of this.This so obviously was likely to happen that it easily could have been anticipated and planned for to be dealt with in a much, much more professional way, and yet clearly they didn't, and it's beyond inexc…

> How they've (mis)handled this will be studied by business and PR students for years to come.

I doubt it. The internet has a very short attention span and online activism is pretty much useless.

Post reply on HN