Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event • Hacker News Board

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#451

Post by Corrado » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 6:10 AM UTC

FooHentai wrote: post #286

hannasanarion wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For real though, changing character design for things like skeletons because it has a different meaning in another culture is a perfectly normal thing to do. Changing characters to scrub them of LGBT characteristics that are illegal in another country is cowardly and should have caused a much bigger outrage than it did. Banning players for supporting pro-democracy movements outside the game and retroactively seizing…

>The Chinese government didn't even threaten them over it. Overtly. But this is a clear example of what is meant when people talk about the 'soft influence' which China seeks to develop. At the crude end of the scale, you have indoctrinated CCP people spreading out globally occupied in various positions able to exert leverage favorable to the party. At the more subtle end you have boards mindful of impacting their bo…

This reminds me of the classic mafia style of management; "Nice profit you got there, it'd be a shame if something happened to it."

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#452

Post by ryacko » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 7:55 AM UTC

darklajid wrote: post #328

ryacko wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But in the West it is expected that token political statements are to be allowed and protected. "Free HK" isn't a particularly complex political statement, and it is over a topic which Westerners think is unfairly suppressed. A similar comparison would be if Saudi Arabia had Blizzard ban someone for saying "Don't execute rape victims."

> But in the West it is expected that token political statements are to be allowed and protected. Is that so? I could imagine a huuuge amount of political statements that are illegal in my home country, Germany. Since I was raised there these rules are ingrained in me: "Free Speech" is not a thing (if we compare it to the US) and - that's the important part - I don't DISAGREE with that. > "Free HK" isn't a particular…

I'm sure there would be some outrage if Spain got a player banned over "Free elections in Catalonia".

Fortunately many dictatorships are foreign and don't understand the subtleties of Western society. (ironic since the Chinese do hire white people for appearances)

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#453

Post by erik_seaberg » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 8:11 AM UTC

smegger001 wrote: post #394

echelon wrote: post #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…

So that just incentivise them to spend foreign capital rather than bring it back. Say the USA passes this legislation you purpose the logical move for Blizzard would be to move development to china so that they could spend more Yen on development avoiding high taxes and have the low tax dollars kept at home.

This. If we punish them for spending foreign profits hiring Americans, sure enough we’ll see them stop doing it.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#454

Post by daemin » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 10:04 AM UTC

jug wrote: post #415

daemin wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will search all persons and bags on entry and confiscate any material that is deemed "political". They will do this on the grounds of safety and security so "people won't throw dangerous objects at competitors" and "nudity and hate speech will not be on signs" as it's an all ages event.

It's still not enough if attendees start chanting. Heck some may go only to do that.

Then they will be "removed from the premises" for "causing a disturbance", with their further entry forfeited.

I'm sure there's some language in the legalese of the ticket already where they can do this "at their discretion".

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#455

Post by lenkite » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 12:14 PM UTC

moksly wrote: post #392

echelon wrote: post #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…

> They've bought out our cinema chains and gaming companies. All the while we never once see China portrayed as an enemy. I agree with most of what you say, but as a Dane who grew up watching Hollywood movies portraying America, it’s also a little funny for this particular part, to be happening to America. Don’t get me wrong, I’d rather be manipulated into liking a free society than a dictatorship, but I’m sure you f…

As an Indian who grew up watching Hollywood movies, I never saw the US imposing their will on Indian Bollywood movies.

So no - I don't follow where you are going.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#456

Post by triceratops » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 4:37 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #449

triceratops wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have deeply held faith in Religion A and you convert to Religion B purely to avoid discrimination, I don't count it as a real change, and the person themselves would probably not either. The only way to really change your religion is to have a heartfelt change in beliefs, and who has conscious control over that? Gender identity doesn't seem to be consciously changeable. Some people's gender may be different fr…

> Familial and veteran status are also not changeable i.e. if you already have children or are a veteran, you can't go back and change that fact. Familial status is changeable: you can marry, have children, divorce, give children up for adoption, and be widowed. All of which change family status. Actually, even aging of children changes family status, since the age of children is itself a factor relating to the famil…

> you can marry, have children, divorce, give children up for adoption, and be widowed

Coercing someone into doing that under pain of discrimination is pretty cruel though.

> though neither is under the full and exclusive control of the possessor of the record

That's why I said not entirely in one's control. I'm aware pardons, expungements exist.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#457

Post by sushid » Thu, Oct 17, 2019, 10:44 PM UTC

moksly wrote: post #392

echelon wrote: post #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…

> They've bought out our cinema chains and gaming companies. All the while we never once see China portrayed as an enemy. I agree with most of what you say, but as a Dane who grew up watching Hollywood movies portraying America, it’s also a little funny for this particular part, to be happening to America. Don’t get me wrong, I’d rather be manipulated into liking a free society than a dictatorship, but I’m sure you f…

There are countless movies that blame US companies, US agencies, US military, etc. in movies. It’s not like all US flags wave the American flag around.

This is in direct comparison to what China tacitly enforces. Good luck try to show the Chinese as the bad guys, much less the the government itself.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#458

Post by mlyle » Fri, Oct 18, 2019, 12:13 AM UTC

knzhou wrote: post #361

alasdair_ wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.”

That's a facile response, because it works for everybody. Everybody intolerant thinks of themselves as a fundamentally tolerant person, whose hand has regrettably been forced by the unforgivable actions of the enemy tribe. From the other side, you look like the intolerant one.

Really, I don't think mentioning Popper is a facile response ;) One should actually be familiar with the source material to criticize it.

You spout relentless apologia for Chinese government actions; for instance, you were arguing with me in the other thread about whether the pressure focused on the NBA/Rockets was Chinese government action. Silver has now confirmed that it was.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#459

Post by modriano » Fri, Oct 18, 2019, 4:25 AM UTC

cthalupa wrote: post #419

modriano wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, public companies "have an obligation to their shareholders to be profitable", and China is a gigantic market. The rules that govern the economy aren't optimized to create equity or equality. They're optimized to push companies to maximize profit and minimize scarcity. Without proper regulation, the companies that optimize for profit will scale much faster than the companies that optimize for ethics or equa…

>In the US, public companies "have an obligation to their shareholders to be profitable", and China is a gigantic market. This simply isn't true and I wish people would stop repeating it. https://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/academics/clarke_business_... > "modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not do so."

I put quotes around the phrase ("have an obligation to their shareholders to be profitable") because even though it's not technically true, it has become a self-reinforcing platitude. Investors enforce that "rule", regardless of the actual law. If Blizzard-Activision said "we are willing to forgo the massive Chinese market and also we want Tencent to immediately divest from their 5% ownership stake", institutional investors would run, and the owners of capital would squeeze hard (as we have seen with Blizzard-Activision, which, to date, hasn't backed down).

That's the system we have.

Re: Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event

#460

Post by triceratops » Sat, Oct 19, 2019, 1:23 AM UTC

flukus wrote: post #448

triceratops wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have deeply held faith in Religion A and you convert to Religion B purely to avoid discrimination, I don't count it as a real change, and the person themselves would probably not either. The only way to really change your religion is to have a heartfelt change in beliefs, and who has conscious control over that? Gender identity doesn't seem to be consciously changeable. Some people's gender may be different fr…

> The only way to really change your religion is to have a heartfelt change in beliefs, and who has conscious control over that? Now consider how that applies to a white supremacist, the also have have a deeply held faith in their beliefs (as with most fringe groups), probably more so than most than most religious people. And their beliefs are often equally abhorrent. Why is it OK to discriminate against people that…

> let's make it illegal for companies to discriminate against individuals

What does that even mean though? You can't discriminate against anyone for any reason whatsoever? What if they have terrible hygiene? Insult everyone around them? A company can't discriminate against candidates who don't have the requisite job skills? They can't fire someone who subtly undermines or plots or otherwise plays politics? Isn't that anti-meritocracy?

Protected classes are (mostly) "what someone is" - that's why they're "protected". The stuff I listed above is "what someone does" and depending on context it's totally valid to use it as a reason for discrimination.

> Now consider how that applies to a white supremacist

White supremacy isn't a religion.

> Why is it OK to discriminate against people that think the white race is superior

How did anyone find out that this person is a white supremacist though? They probably said or did something, right? Seems like discrimination due to actions, not beliefs, to me. As a businessperson would you trust an employee who openly proclaims such beliefs to treat all their co-workers or your customers with equal respect? At the very least, I'd question their judgement in other matters, because they fell for such an idiotic and backward ideology and then talked about it. As a citizen, would you trust a government official who espoused such views to treat everyone they deal with equally?

> not to discriminate against people that think they're gods chosen people?

Because it's a religious belief (I understand that's a tautology - "it's illegal because it's illegal"). Nevertheless if your employee goes beyond belief into action - discriminates against a colleague or customer - you have grounds to fire them.

> What do we do when a religion thinks it's OK to discriminate against gay people?

Side with the party being discriminated against in that case. It's also not OK for a gay person to discriminate against someone based on religion.

> Some people switch based on mood

Not at all. Some people have different gender identities at different times. That's still part of their gender identity. Calling it "based on mood" makes it seem capricious and arbitrary. But if it was really so then wouldn't they choose not to do it so they could fit into what society generally expects - being cisgendered. Most people want a hassle-free life and don't want to be discriminated against.

> And as a social construct it can change based on societal expectations and roles.

This is a meaningless statement. "I'm female/genderfluid but I'm expected to act male in my society due to my body so I'll do that to fit in." is pretty oppressive. That same person may be able to live their true identity in a more free society. Voila gender changed due to "societal expectations", but the fault really was of society. It wasn't the individual's choice to hide their identity in the more repressive society.

> a willing participant in wars of aggression

People join the military out of a sense of patriotism, to get an education, to escape poverty, or travel and see the world. They don't decide to start wars of aggression, the politicians do that. It's also bad national policy (in terms of self-preservation) to allow discrimination based on veteran status, because that will discourage people from serving in future. Regardless of one's feelings about individual conflicts, most nations today can't do without a military and you have to treat service members well after they have served.