Live data from Hacker News

The Big [Censored] Theory

pudding.cool

741–750 of 891 posts

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#741

The following stuff is censored in China: TV series or movies should be edited if they have the following content: (1) distorting Chinese and other countries’ culture and society; (2) defaming Chinese military forces, policemen, and judiciary; (3) showcasing obscenity content, either visual or verbal; (4) showcasing “excessive” images of murder, violence, horror, interrogation, drug-taking, and even gambling; (5) adv…

> (1) distorting Chinese and other countries’ culture and society;

Then no sarcasm is allowed which is an important measure to critize a state and its behaviour.

> (2) defaming Chinese military forces, policemen, and judiciary;

Same as for (1), making these groups "untouchable" and "uncritizeable" (if that's a word)

> (3) showcasing obscenity content, either visual or verbal;

Who defines "obscene"? The Ministry of Truth? The president? The government? Your mother?

> (4) showcasing “excessive” images of murder, violence, horror, interrogation, drug-taking, and even gambling;

Is there any movie where such display is not used as a negative example in the end or to explore the boundaries of human downfall? Tony Montana is not really the hero in the end, same goes for Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill or Fight Club.

> (5) advertise negative and decadent values or deliberately exaggerate the negative part of society;

Yeah, please don't put your finger where it hurts, we don't like that so much, someone could have a bad opinion of a broken state.

> (6) advocate religious extremism;

"Being Christian" is enough to be considered extremist in China, I think. Or let's ask the Uigurs how well these rules work for them.

> (7) advocate environmental destruction and animal torture;

Especially China is very good at the practical side of this, really no need to make movies about that. Besides that: Are there any movies where animals are tortured?

> (8) excessively showcase alcohol addiction, smoking, or other bad habits;

Same as with (4).

> (9) demonstrate other illegal content.

Bingo. Wildcard.

> How would simply not putting this kind of negative stuff in our media not benefit us?

You can't simply close your eyes and hope everything will get better by itself.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#742
post #696

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I should remind you of the actual words in the gp comment. > Let's take your first point for example. If I go on Fox News right now and search for articles about the 2020 election being stolen, I get plenty of articles and opinions talking about it. How exactly was it censored, and how is it comparable to censorship in China? You have conveniently pivoted to a straw man argument about Covid-19 which was not men…

You are right that he conflated two types of censorship in the West. The first is as you say, eliminate it from mainstream media and let lunatics ramble about it on social media (vaccines, lab theory, etc.). This has an impact on the legitimacy of what's being said, and your exposure to these ideas. The second type of censorship is the outright ban of certain topics, such as the Hunter Biden laptop.

Really? The mainstream media didn’t cover the hunter biden laptop?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/hunter-...

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#743
post #241
post #58

We have this kind of censorship in India as well, even the in weirdly innocous places. In James Bond movies, and I think Gone Girl as well, scenes were by zooming into character's faces or just straight cuts. This is probably the only reason I maintain a US iTunes accounts (used to have to buy gift cards from sketchy sites online to keep this going, but I recently discovered that my Indian Amex card works fine with a…

There is a home version of this called ClearPlay that auto-redacts movies and TV. It actually started with DVD players (!) but now does streaming. Ref: https://amazon.clearplay.com/

Thanks for the tip. I did not know this exists...

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#744
post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Growing up in Sweden, I mainly watched Swedish (original or dubbed) shows as a kid. Once we got satellite and I started watching American channels I had my first encounter with censorship. Bleeps and blurs and random spots where audio cuts out. It was very jarring. I couldn't understand it at all and still can't. It really stands out, breaks the flow, makes everything feel cheap and ugly. In real life people swear an…

TV edits ruin everything. There's a scene in Independence Day where Will Smith's character is running from an alien fighter, and he says "oh no you did not shoot that green shit at me." TV edits make it "green stuff," and it does not work.

I feel the same way about some radio/music video edits of songs. The one which really bothers me is Cee Lo green's "Fuck You". At some point Spotify randomly played the clean version of it, called "Forget You" and it just doesn't work. It turns a snappy and fun highlight into an awkward moment.

Excessive profanity generally makes things sound less eloquent, but limited use can be really good for emphasis.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#745
post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The paradox of tolerance isn’t really a paradox, it’s a proof by contradiction that the naive notion of tolerance is not sound. Homosexuality is a natural observable phenomenon in the human species across time and cultures. It is an aspect of people as fundamental as height or skin tone. Not accepting them for any reason is intolerance and does not have to be tolerated. It is also intolerance to not accept Muslims, b…

You're misunderstanding the paradox of tolerance, at least as Karl Popper originally formulated it. The only form of intolerance Popper recognized was bigotry around beliefs. The concepts (and words) homophobia, racism, transphobia, and islamophobia were not even invented when he wrote about the paradox of intolerance. When he described the intolerant, he specifically meant people who would use violence to stop other…

I’m not inverting is meaning, I just have a broader definition of what things constitute violent acts of suppression of beliefs. I see this misunderstanding constantly online, that hate speech, *phobia, and *ism is an expression of belief rather than an act of violence that suppresses the speech of the group being targeted.

Here, let’s talk about the person who literally replied to your post. Quoting it since I’m sure they will, rightfully, get banned.

> Btw, tolerance, like democracy is just a bulls$##t concept. Would you like to be tolerant of the neo-trans man going to the same toilet as your teenage daughters??? [wawjgreen] [1]

This is hate speech. This is not an expression of belief or rational argument. It’s not even an argument at all, it’s just an emotional appeal to transphobia with the goal of changing your perception of trans women to that of man who is out to sexually assault teen girls, and a direct call to not tolerate them (i.e suppress their speech). Couldn’t have asked for a better example to just fall into the thread.

In contrast, someone expressing a belief or making an actual argument like, “I know that not allowing trans men and women to use the bathroom that matches their gender will cause them dysphoria, but as a matter of public policy here is why I think bathroom bills are necessary…” is not transphobia and is speech that should be tolerated.

[1] And also take a moment to appreciate an IRL instance of accidental-ally. Obviously we don’t want trans men in the women’s restroom.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#746
post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's utterly baffling to someone who thinks about the law like a programmer. Programmers seem to think about the law like a program, like a set of rules governing system behaviour and so long as they are not directly violated, this one neat trick judges hate will let them do whatever it is without recourse. But that's not true, firstly because the law is fuzzy and deals with human behaviour, including taking wider…

I understand that point of view in general, but in this case the only thing making the service a violation in the first place was one dumb trick. I would argue that Aereo was doing their best to remove technicalities. The ruling also managed to make the law even more inconsistent. If I rent an antenna and install it in a datacenter for TV, that's kosher. If I rent an antenna and pay someone else to install it in a da…

I guess that's where intent comes in? It looks like a technical workaround with the same end result...

But also I won't deny the copyright owners have done a great job in making the law do exactly what they want it to, nothing more and nothing less.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#747

Is aversion to discussion of sex a part of traditional Chinese culture? Seems odd given I'm not aware of any puritanical religions taking hold there.

I wonder why the USA puts +18 on nipples instead of just cutting them out, and publish the rest as family friendly.

The world probably had much better visual media then.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#748
post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My Mormon neighbors tend to use VidAngel, which got in huge trouble with an absolutely hilarious payment model. 1. VidAngel purchases a bunch of Blu-ray discs and stores them in a warehouse 2. Tag all the content of a film and create filters so the user can, for example, filter out all sex and violence but leave in vulgarity 3. User "purchases" a Blu-ray for $20 (!!) and VidAngel says, "since we now know you're the o…

Vidangel is a pretty absurd company. I read recently that they are still around and trying to come up with their next strategy. It does raise an interesting question for me though: is Hollywood losing out on profits by not offering censored versions of their content? Clearly there’s some demand. People like to make arguments about artistic integrity, but they have no problem censoring content to air on network tv.

so, censoring a film is editing the intended form. this seems damaging to creators. also, if a movie has a bunch of sex and violence that gets censored out, what remains is still the intended context for the sex and violence, so why would a concerned person even watch it in the first place? absurd! like, for example, pulp fiction...how the fuck would a censored version make any sense, and who in gods fucking name would watch it!? i think selling edited material via censorship and providing censorship as a service is criminal. if you dont like porn, dont watch edited porn ;(

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#749
post #738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? It's a comedy tv series. I'm a slav and from the balkans, we're either portrayed as tracksuit wearing thugs, drunks or in some relation to the balkan wars. So what? We even have our own comedy tv series playing with the stereotypes (eg. Kursadzije), where all the stereotypes are used all the time (serbs and croats have historic "issues", montenegrins are lazy, bosnians are stupid and slovenians are femboys).…

Another stereotype that exists is that all balkans are raging racists and will start war with anyone close by because they deem them subhuman. This is just a stereotype, so "so what?" right? And when you are waving off "laughing at stupid bosnians" as "so what?" this doesn't contradict that stereotype but rather reinforces it. So do you think it's fair that I assume you are indeed racist and treat you as such? You wo…

If you do it in a comedy way, sure, why not?

If we can joke about cops (reno 911), bar owners (it's always sunny in philadelphia), rural americans (king of the hill and many, many other), canadians (south park), italians (euro trip), gingers (south park), nerds (pretty much every college movie), french girls (malcolm in the middle), middle managers (basically, every office-based movie), bodybuilders (brooklyn 99), "aspiring actresses" (working as baristas), student cooks (usually by gordon ramsey), .... why not us? Oh and let's not forget blondes.

Do you assume all italians wear stockings and molest other guys on trains if you've seen Eurotrip (movie)? Nope. Do you assume all french girls don't shave? Nope. So if the whole of the balkans, including bosnia has many many jokes with "Mujo and Haso" (they represent a "stupid" couple of guys, where the pun is in their stupidity, why do you (I assume you're not from the balkans) get to be offended for other people? There's even a movie just with jokes about them... made by bosnians of course - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5085118/

We also have regional jokes, where in slovenia, people assume that people from gorenjska region are stingy (in serbia, it's people from pirot).

A joke is a joke, you don't have to get offended for other people.

edit: also, we don't start wars because we thing the others are subhuman, we just stereotipically hate eachother (as groups, not as individuals), due to historic reasons, mostly war-related.

ps: What you americans would call racism could only be mentioned maybe against gypsies here (eve though they're techncally the same race). And even that is mostly by assuming, that if someone stole your gutters around the house (or basically anything metal), that it was the gypsies. Usually it's even true.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#750

The following stuff is censored in China: TV series or movies should be edited if they have the following content: (1) distorting Chinese and other countries’ culture and society; (2) defaming Chinese military forces, policemen, and judiciary; (3) showcasing obscenity content, either visual or verbal; (4) showcasing “excessive” images of murder, violence, horror, interrogation, drug-taking, and even gambling; (5) adv…

Nice try Xi.
Post reply on HN