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

Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 44 posts

Re: Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

#31

Post by [deleted] »

theonething wrote: post #29
jrflowers wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s

> Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s Right. When I stated that puritan morality existed 2000 years ago, that totally means that there were no displays of nudity at all back then. Everything has to be 100% one way or the ot…

[deleted]

Re: Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

#32

Post by [deleted] »

jrflowers wrote: post #24
theonething wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been around for at least 2000 years.

Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s

[deleted]

Re: Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

#33

Post by [deleted] »

theonething wrote: post #29
jrflowers wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s

> Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s Right. When I stated that puritan morality existed 2000 years ago, that totally means that there were no displays of nudity at all back then. Everything has to be 100% one way or the ot…

[deleted]

Re: Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

#34

Post by jrflowers »

theonething wrote: post #29
jrflowers wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s

> Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s Right. When I stated that puritan morality existed 2000 years ago, that totally means that there were no displays of nudity at all back then. Everything has to be 100% one way or the ot…

> The idea that different kinds of morality could exist among different groups of people, even across individuals, in the world in the same time period is just absurd isn't it?

I am sorry I thought that you meant that puritan morals have existed for over 2000 years not that they could have existed over 2000 years.

The fact that modern interpretation of Puritanism may have existed at any point in time is proof positive that pornography as currently defined is bad and should be banned

Re: Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

#36

Post by Pigalowda »

krapp wrote: post #16
thegrim22 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the morals our societies have held for hundreds/thousands of years around moral decency and civility had a point. But I guess I'm glad you're wiser than all the generations that came before you, and you know better than all of them.

The morals our societies held for hundreds/thousands of years were held to justify slavery, blood sacrifice, antisemitism, genocide, rape, witch hunts, inquisitions, white supremacy, child labor and countless other once noble and virtuous ends now considered among humanity's greatest atrocities and horrors. Of course that also depends on when and where you look, because those morals have also evolved over time even w…

So wiser generations approve of porn on twitch? Nice.

Re: Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

#38

Post by filoleg »

mx_03 wrote: post #28
SilverBirch wrote: post #5

This issue would be much easier to solve if Twitch weren't owned by Amazon. Any platform is either porn or not porn. If you allow porn, if the porn is successful it'll drive everything else out. So either you have a platform that is not-porn, and bans porn, or it's porn and it's only got porn. The easy thing to do as a business would be to just have Twitch, and then have a sister company Twatch that allows porn. All…

Wasnt that how twitch started? A sister company of JustinTV and then they closed JustinTV because it didnt make sense

It started as JustinTV, but it wasn’t for adult content or anything.

JustinTV started just as a single channel website showing the 24/7 irl livestream of one of the founders, Justin Kan. Then they slowly opened it up for others to be able to host their own livestream.

Bit by bit, some people started streaming games rather than irl. Very quickly, gaming became the most popular thing to stream there and overtook most of the platform.

JustinTV staff then spun-off gaming channels on JustinTV into its own new gaming-only platform, Twitch. For a while they were running side-by-side. But as Twitch started becoming more generalist and less gaming-only, yeah, it became clear there is no point in keeping JustinTV alive, if Twitch became their all encompassing superset of JustinTV.

I think the main difference is that Twitch and JustinTV didn’t have that much of a boundary in terms of content as SFW/NSFW split would. Their difference was mostly thematic, so it made sense to them at the time to eventually pool it all into one streaming platform.

But that’s where we currently are with the problem of what’s allowed in twitch and what isn’t. Unlike with SFW/NSFW separation, Twitch wasn’t created for the purpose of hosting content that wasn’t allowed on JustinTV. It was created because gaming started overwhelming any other content on JustinTV, and they wanted the original irl livestreaming content of JustinTV to not die due to it all being games. Games were allowed on JustinTV just fine before that. JustinTV was rendered truly pointless once Twitch introduced IRL and “just chatting” categories, as that was just essentially a “justintv section”.

Note: not disagreeing with you, you are correct. Just wanted to provide a bit more nuance to how it went down, as well as some context for why I don’t think that their separation approach would have the same type of an outcome as a SFW/NSFW spin-off would.

Re: Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

#39

Post by filoleg »

MeImCounting wrote: post #19
belthesar wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really want to look at the source of truth of why these decisions are made, all you have to do is Follow The Money. Two key reasons I can posit: Advertisers do not want their products advertised next to adversarial content. The exodus of advertisers on Twitter/X is a great parallel - flood a user generated content platform with content that does not bode for positive brand associations, and brands stop paying.…

This is a great and thoughtful comment. I think part of the sexual repression I was talking about is a big reason why porn is so popular and why: "Things like claims "I didn't pay for this!" when a partner happens to see a charge for a pornographic product, buyer's remorse as the truth of a parasocial relationship plays out to an unsatisfying conclusion, whatever the reason" are so prevalent. It is a sad thing and so…

I thought about it just now, and it made me think of a potential solution. Though it feels so simple and naive (I feel like it shouldn’t work), but I couldn’t find a reason for why it wouldn’t, so I am curious what people think about this.

Imagine there was a special type of a payment card that would work with only adult-content provider websites (aka porn). It would function sort of like a debit card, you can load up money on it from other sources, you can withdraw money from it at any time, etc. However, no chargebacks allowed (which are already not really a thing with regular debit cards anyway, it is mostly a credit card feature).

For bonus points, you can have some sort of a verification (maybe requiring 2FA, maybe something else) that would kick in every time you load money on that card, but NOT when you use that card to pay for anything. So adult content providers won’t need any verification to do on their part (aka you won’t need to give them any of your identifying info).

I guess what I am describing is literally just a quirky kind of a debit card/account that attempts to resolve issues that stem from the whole “chargeback of shame” scenario, thus making the transactions less high-risk for payment processors/providers. Which would, conversely, make payment processing less of a problem for the adult-content providers and, therefore, customers.

P.S. do adult-content providers currently have any issues with debit cards as the payment source? Asking because if chargebacks were the main concern for the payment processors (which would refuse to work with adult-content providers due to chargebacks making it high-risk), then by that logic they should have no problem with debit cards, since they feature no chargebacks. The only thing my proposal adds on top of that is the verification/dispute with the bank/card issuer would be done not on the level of each individual transaction for an adult service, but on the level of loading up that “adult-only” card (and what happens from that point on is not accessible to your bank). Which also makes the situation a bit less “embarrassing” for the customer too.

Re: Twitch Reverses Policy on 'Artistic Nudity' After Just Two Days

#40

Post by filoleg »

mharig wrote: post #35

The hysterical (and hypocritical) extremism concerning nudity is an US-american thing. Hopefully the domination of that 'culture' will timely fade away.

It isn’t some cultural/moral US problem, and it doesn’t really have anything to do with puritanism.

It is a universal “i was in the moment and paid for a sub to a porn website, but the day after I regretted that decision and decided to make a payment chargeback/reversal and claim fraud” problem. Which is what leads to payment processors (Visa/MasterCard/Amex/etc.) designating adult-content providers as high-risk businesses, as each chargeback has a cost associated with it. And a good number of payment processors decided it wasn’t worth it to deal with them due to that.

If this was a uniquely US problem, then payment processors providing services outside of the US would have no issues with working with, let’s say, EU-only adult-content providers. However, something is telling me that Visa/MasterCard absolutely don’t care about the locality of service of any given adult-content provider, and neither do they care about any of the moral decisions here. It is all about the bottom line and the cost of doing business.

Hell, payment processors never even claimed any moral ground for refusing to work with adult-content providers, which would make sense for them to grandstand on for the boost in their public image, if the whole thing was truly due to some puritanism culture around nudity in the US. But nope, payment processors claimed as much that it all boils down to the cost of doing business with adult-content providers due to high chargeback rates.

Post reply on HN