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

341–350 of 412 posts

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#341

Post by slenk »

556343throwaway wrote: post #336
zanny wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not so sure it's okay I'm not sure its okay for China to be maiming and killing protestors while trying to subjugate a city under tyranny, The reality is that there are not okay things out there, and people often feel helpless against them, and will do things others will feel is not okay to try to get their message across when they feel the okay way isn't working. And as a global people we should support those…

There hasn’t been a single death in Hong Kong. The same can’t be said about the current protests in Iraq, Sudan, Indonesia, and Kashmir.

Such a bad argument: "Well X did it first so we're fine"

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#342

Post by rayiner »

tptacek wrote: post #254
rayiner wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

So far, I haven’t really seen it outside campuses, but there is a strong push to have private companies deplatform people, and government action is always a tool in the toolchest that people might invoke.

As to your second point, FIRE tends to advocate for free speech on campus generally, including private schools. A lot of the right-wing attempts at suppressing speech happen at places like private religious schools (Duquensque and Georgetown are two top posts in the FIRE website). I tend to stop short of that—I think private schools are free to restrict speech in ways public schools are not. But, as I said in my post, attempts to suppress speech have historically been a right wing phenomenon.

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#343

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #342
tptacek wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

So far, I haven’t really seen it outside campuses, but there is a strong push to have private companies deplatform people, and government action is always a tool in the toolchest that people might invoke. As to your second point, FIRE tends to advocate for free speech on campus generally, including private schools. A lot of the right-wing attempts at suppressing speech happen at places like private religious schools…

But private companies deplatforming people is exactly the thing you were speaking approvingly of earlier; that's simple freedom of association, articulated through commercial pressure.

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#344

Post by COGlory »

SilasX wrote: post #69
UseStrict wrote: post #4

It's a weird day when I find myself agreeing with Marco Rubio. But it's true, China is effectively attempting a global chill on free speech by gating market access. If we don't stand up now, the effects will be felt long into the future.

Where are the usual geniuses that feel obligated to explain to us that this doesn't violate the First Amendment, with the subtle implication that we therefore shouldn't care about it?

I appreciate the sentiment, but surely there's a less inflammatory way to make this point?

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#345

Post by spathi_fwiffo »

celticmusic wrote: post #333
spathi_fwiffo wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fine, I'll be more specific about my problem with your statement: To me, it sounded like you were judging the previous poster as if he was making a moral defense of Blizzard/EAs actions. While skipping the section of his email where he alluded to their actions being immoral -- thus doing the same thing to them that you are claiming I did to you.

The comment I quoted mirrors a very common sentiment a segment of the population uses to defend their shitty behavior, and I was pointing out that this sentiment only truly makes sense to those who have nothing inoffensive to say. Whether that applies to the poster in question or not, I couldn't tell you.

thanks. that's the kind of clarification i was requesting.

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#346

Post by mrosett »

secraetomani wrote: post #331
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…

These kind of decisions are made by a 5th level middle manager, not by the CEO or the PR department. Just like when the Delta flight crew forcefully removed that doctor from the airplane. Or a Starbucks employee calling the police on black people waiting there. By the time PR get's involved, it's too late. This is one crucial vulnerability of many companies in today's world, any low level employee can generate a huge…

Ha - one bit of irony here is that it was actually United, not Delta, that removed the doctor from the plane. That's another angle in these situations. People remember the outcry, but not all of the details.

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#347

Post by pnw_hazor »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #60

And that's why FIFA bans all political displays or comments, and displays of any symbols in general... I expect Blizzard to follow suit.

Interesting, the MLS (Major League Soccer), a US professional soccer league, recently faced this issue because a flag associated with an antifa/anti-nazi affiliated group was being displayed by fans at some matches.

At first they banned it, then after some consideration they temporarily unbanned it. (Temporarily, because the league said they will reconsider its flag rules in the off-season.)

https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/sounders/mls-lifts-ban-o...

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#348

Post by LocalH »

gamblor956 wrote: post #259
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…

Adobe changed their stance on refunds, I think. Unfortunately, it seems that the link on their site[0], which I read on Monday in English, has apparently been replaced with a Spanish version. Machine translation of relevant quote:

>If you purchased your products directly with Adobe, you will receive a refund before the end of the month for any license period paid and not received. We are working for our distributors to act in the same way.

[0] https://helpx.adobe.com/la/x-productkb/policy-pricing/execut...

Re: Fallout from Blizzard Hong Kong Incident

#349

Post by filoleg »

556343throwaway wrote: post #336
zanny wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not so sure it's okay I'm not sure its okay for China to be maiming and killing protestors while trying to subjugate a city under tyranny, The reality is that there are not okay things out there, and people often feel helpless against them, and will do things others will feel is not okay to try to get their message across when they feel the okay way isn't working. And as a global people we should support those…

There hasn’t been a single death in Hong Kong. The same can’t be said about the current protests in Iraq, Sudan, Indonesia, and Kashmir.

>There hasn’t been a single death in Hong Kong.

What about many people who got "disappeared" during the protests? We have no way of knowing how many of them are dead, and I bet at least a few of them might be, with the rest just being tortured and imprisoned per usual.

Post reply on HN