Live data from Hacker News

Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

bloomberg.com

201–210 of 460 posts

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong, the casters were fired because they knew what was going to transpire and actively let it happen.

I don't think that's true, I believe the casters have said Blitzchung showed up on the live interview stream (it was remote) wearing the gas mask unexpectedly. If someone is to cut him off and not let it happen, it's the job of the production crew. The job of the casters is to try to keep things entertaining and on the rails when the camera's live on them. It's not fair to punish casters for improvising a response.

>I believe the casters have said Blitzchung showed up on the live interview stream (it was remote) wearing the gas mask unexpectedly.

Nah that's wrong. Have you watched the live feed video?

Here's a translation of what was said by the casters.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Competitiveoverwatch/comments/dfs7a...

So many mistruths being spread and believed as facts, it's sad really.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#202
We need to impose an 80% repatriation tax on any profits earned in China in order to offset the damages done to our domestic freedom of speech.

China should not be able to control society outside of its own walls, yet they have blatantly influenced the behavior of our biggest mass media companies for years.

To be fair, they've done an outstanding job of it. They fund a huge number of film productions. They've bought out our cinema chains and gaming companies. All the while we never once see China portrayed as an enemy.

Games are not permitted to promote LGBT acceptance. Films sometimes bend backwards to include China as a strong and moral ally. These aren't just one-sided impacts of the Great Firewall - China is directly altering the media we create domestically. They're changing the world narrative to enhance their reputation and take power from their enemies. They'll happily fund films that are critical of American history (and even if that's justified, it's terribly one-sided).

And now what was once simply a chilling effect on what types of media could be created has now manifested as proactive enforcement of China's will. How long will it be before China can force westerners it disagrees with out of their jobs? We never imagined something like Blizzard's treatment of Blitzchung would be possible, yet now we're beginning to see how deep China's political tentacles reach.

We have to stop this.

Tax companies doing business in China.

Disincentivize this blatant attack on of our freedom of speech. Don't let China change our cultural zeitgeist.

Tax any and all domestic profits coming from China. Heavily.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#203

The huge question here is what's going to happen at BlizzCon in two weeks. There'll be 40,000+ attendees, cameras everywhere, there are usually Q&A panels, homemade signs for player support, cosplay, everything. How can you host BlizzCon when you're terrified of political speech?

I, and several friends, all have tickets. We're still deciding what form of protest will be most effective (too overt and the message gets quickly lost when security kicks you out).

"too overt and the message gets quickly lost when security kicks you out"

True, but also be prepared to be searched. If security can't legally search people, given the size of the event, they will very likely have police to patrol and do random checks "in case of terrorism", so hide your HK shirts, signs etc. because they would almost surely be confiscated for "inciting violence". If Blizzard fears any negative demonstration, they'll probably use every means for painting those supporting HK protests as violent disruptors and have police arresting them.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The intent of the founders was to ensure that citizens and journalists could speak out against their government without fear of retribution by the state. The "anything ought to be fine to say anywhere without consequence" interpretation is a modern phenomenon that extremists have used to platform and normalize violent suppressive rhetoric.

That is a horrible mischaracterization of free speech. The first telegraph network banned journalists who reported bad things against the telegraph company. They manipulated stock prices and influenced elections. That is why common carriage laws were made, which required communications platforms to provide neutral service to everyone. I'm sure that you would have been there, bravely defending the coal barons right to…

Reporting on union organizing is not the same thing as issuing death threats. You're working really hard to blur the clear line between these two things, why?

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: I'm being downvote bombed for this, which is strange. Anyone care to articulate reasons for disagreeing? Would it be correct to boycott CloudFlare for deplatforming the Daily Stormer? No, because there's nothing wrong with deplatforming Nazis, there was nothing morally reprehensible in Cloudflare's actions. Would it be correct to boycott Blizzard for severely over-reacting to a pro Hong Kong political act on on…

I downvoted, since the two incidents are fundamentally about free speech (I have a post attached to a sibling that explains why I think this applies to private companies too). That one form of speech is detested while the other is supported doesn't change that it's fundamentally about free speech. To be slightly hyperbolic, it's impossible to say something of substance that doesn't offend someone. If all we're allowe…

No, they aren't. Hong Kong is about free speech insofar as the protestors are fighting for their freedom of speech from the Chinese (and Chinese proxy) government.

You do not, should not, and will never have a "right" to "free speech" in media that are privately owned and managed by others. You have a right to not have a government censor your speech. The federal government cannot compell you to remove an editorial from your blog criticizing the government. They may not compell your isp to bar traffic to that blog. Insofar as the ISP is a government mandated oligopoly, it's reasonable to argue that they may not block access to your ip. Must a blogging website provide you hosting? No. You never had such a "right" and you never will. You can argue that they have a duty to provide you equitable and fair service, but we rarely use duties in western political philosophy (an example would be Australia compelling citizens to vote).

Private citizens may or may not publish your material on their media at their discretion. You have zero right to any of their bandwidth, resources, or otherwise, again, in general. Furthermore you shouldn't, because that would in fact be tantamount to governmenr infringement of the freedom of speech of those private citizens.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#206

This is a crisis point for everyone who supports political free speech. Every corporation and business person is watching this to see which hurts their bottom line less, suppressing free speech globally, or angering China. As consumers, we must make sure that they get the message loud and clear that suppressing free speech globally on behalf of China is going to hurt their bottom line far more than China will. Otherw…

I agree with you completely, but this whole debacle has highlighted what seems to be hypocrisy in the general public's reaction to this. Remember when The Daily Stormer got kicked off CloudFlare and a whole host of other platforms, to the point that no one would take their business and they were effectively censored? The average take on that seemed to be a mix of "Free speech doesn't apply to private companies" and "…

Karl Popper explained in detail why it’s perfectly rational to praise tolerance and still be intolerant of intolerance.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

“if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.”

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's true, I believe the casters have said Blitzchung showed up on the live interview stream (it was remote) wearing the gas mask unexpectedly. If someone is to cut him off and not let it happen, it's the job of the production crew. The job of the casters is to try to keep things entertaining and on the rails when the camera's live on them. It's not fair to punish casters for improvising a response.

>I believe the casters have said Blitzchung showed up on the live interview stream (it was remote) wearing the gas mask unexpectedly. Nah that's wrong. Have you watched the live feed video? Here's a translation of what was said by the casters. https://www.reddit.com/r/Competitiveoverwatch/comments/dfs7a... So many mistruths being spread and believed as facts, it's sad really.

Original source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYCUVBKjddE

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#209

Mark Kern (ex-lead WoW dev, and dev for Starcraft/Warcraft/Diablo 2) posted a good analysis of Blizzard's statement on Blitzchung. https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352?ref_sr...

FYI, for folks who aren't familiar, Mark Kern's history also includes full throated support of GamerGate and being removed from a CEO role at Red 5 by the board of directors. (Allegedly for erratic and disruptive behavior.)

It's been a really, really wild ride seeing lefty twitter and righty twitter hold hands and agree that Blizzard did the wrong thing. (Though for different reasons.)

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I downvoted, since the two incidents are fundamentally about free speech (I have a post attached to a sibling that explains why I think this applies to private companies too). That one form of speech is detested while the other is supported doesn't change that it's fundamentally about free speech. To be slightly hyperbolic, it's impossible to say something of substance that doesn't offend someone. If all we're allowe…

No, they aren't. Hong Kong is about free speech insofar as the protestors are fighting for their freedom of speech from the Chinese (and Chinese proxy) government. You do not, should not, and will never have a "right" to "free speech" in media that are privately owned and managed by others. You have a right to not have a government censor your speech. The federal government cannot compell you to remove an editorial f…

Where, on the internet, do I have a right to free speech?

The internet is pivotal to modern communications, yet it is effectively entirely private. If the citizens and their representatives felt strongly enough to create common carrier laws for telegraphs (see a sibling comment for more details), why should we feel differently about speech that travels over channels designed and built for communication across internet?

> governmenr infringement of the freedom of speech of those private citizens

Those "private citizens" are actually corporations making billions of dollars in profit to provide us, in part, with communication channels on their platforms.

Post reply on HN