SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
You might say we're all living inside a ruinous waking nightmare that spawned from the dream of Web 2.0.
Don't get me wrong: It was a beautiful dream.
Web 2.0. We are all of us producers. With our blogs and our comments and our tweets and our YouTube channels we will democratise content and the algorithms -- those glorious algorithms -- will aid in the process. We will upvote and favourite and like and the wheat will be separated from the chaff.
Magic.
I think we can all agree that Web 2.0 didn't quite work as advertised.
It gave us Minecraft. It gave us Wikipedia, collaborative spaces, online tools. But it also gave us Cambridge Analytica, Facebook, Gamergate, incels, toxic communities, Logan Paul wandering into a suicide forest. It gave us Twitter bullying, Kelly Marie Tran harassment campaigns on Instagram.
It gave us terrible, opportunistic video games about school shootings.
Wednesday, after yanking Active Shooter, a video game where you play as a high school shooter, from its Steam store, Valve made an announcement. In a blog titled "Who gets to be on the Steam Store" Valve discussed the steps it's taking to prevent a video game like Active Shooter from making it to the Steam store in the future.
Its solution is about as Web 2.0 as it gets.
"[W]e've decided," wrote Valve, "that the right approach is to allow everything onto the Steam Store, except for things that we decide are illegal, or straight up trolling."
"Taking this approach allows us to focus less on trying to police what should be on Steam, and more on building those tools to give people control over what kinds of content they see."
In 2018, at this current moment, it seems like a decision out of time. An old-fashioned solution to a problem that literally every single platform on the internet is currently trying to solve. We live in a world where Facebook, Twitter and Instagram are in the process of trying to actively take responsibility for the content produced and posted on their platforms.
Meanwhile, Valve is busy trying to abdicate that responsibility.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @05:59PM (18 children)
That is, it gave an even louder speaker to the Authoritarians, who are constantly on the search for the right people to lead us all towards the Promised Land.
Well, there is no Promised Land, and even if there were, there's nobody capable enough to lead us all without resorting to tyranny.
Valve made a huge mistake. If they had just said "We will allow everything" (as long as people pay to list their stuff), then they'd be completely off the hook. Now, they've made themselves the great Authorities, and the whining Authoritarians will hold their feet to the fire of their own making whenever something popularly deemed "trolling" rears its head (like, I don't know, a game that questions the existence of black holes, amirite Soylentils?).
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:16PM (17 children)
It's Valve's prerogative because it's their platform. If you don't like it create your own.
This is not censorship. This does not prevent [shitty] game developers from using other means to get to market. If you are a game developer and are unable to properly gauge how the public will react to your bad judgement, don't blame Valve.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:19PM (14 children)
Censorship is not just when the government removes someone's speech. The concept of corporate censorship [wikipedia.org] has existed for a long time, so update your dictionary. Just because something is called censorship doesn't make it illegal. So, Valve can censor all they want, and people can correctly refer to their actions as "censorship."
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:27PM (11 children)
Sorry, but you are wrong. Valve is not trying to stop the game company from releasing their game, which would be censorship. Valve is only saying "not on our platform", which is not censorship.
You need to update your dictionary (or maybe open a thesaurus) so you don't try to use inflammatory or provocative words just because you don't like someone else - like Valve - protecting their good name. You not liking it != censorship.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:06PM (4 children)
Censorship does not need to completely eradicate the speech for it to be censorship, because otherwise one could say that censorship does not exist at all. Even if they only ban the game on their platform, that is still censorship on their platform. They are allowed to do that, but it is still censorship. Even if you find the term to be too inflammatory or provocative, that still doesn't mean it's not censorship.
Really, the concept of corporate censorship exists and has for decades. Language evolves. Trying to ignore how people use language is nothing short of futile.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Saturday June 09 2018, @08:39PM (3 children)
No corporation has censorship ability. So, NO, it does not exist.
NOT IN MY HOUSE is not censorship. Its merely private property rights.
I'm pretty sure you'd agree the my right to wield a megaphone stops well short of your bedroom door.
Why do you insist on denying others such control of private property?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @08:53PM
On what do you base that argument? Are you saying that no definition of the term "censorship" exists that could apply to corporations? If so, you are flat-out incorrect, as I demonstrated previously. Really, just search around for "corporate censorship" to see that the term has been used this way for quite a while. Are you next going to argue against the indisputable fact that language changes over time, and that more definitions can be added to existing words?
False dichotomy. It can be both.
Why do you insist on making straw man arguments? I mentioned several times that they are allowed to censor.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by dry on Sunday June 10 2018, @03:24AM
Of course "not in my house" is a form of censorship, you're censoring someones speech if you say something like "no swearing in my house". Nothing wrong with that as it is part of your property rights, but censoring someones speech is the definitions of censorship.
The second definition from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/censor [dictionary.com]
(Score: 2) by Fluffeh on Tuesday June 12 2018, @03:58AM
It's so common in the media, there is actually a nick-name for that EXACT thing. It's called Catch and Kill [wikipedia.org].
From the link:
Tabloids may pay for stories. Besides scoops meant to be headline stories, this can be used to censor stories damaging to the paper's allies. Known as "catch and kill", tabloid newspapers may pay someone for the exclusive rights to a story, then choose not to run it.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Captival on Saturday June 09 2018, @10:25PM
Fuck you. Just fuck off. Stop trying to redefine terms so that you SJW Nazis get to ban anything you want and it's OK because you changed the word censorship to mean "only bad when people besides us do it".
(Score: 4, Insightful) by khallow on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:58PM (4 children)
I disagree.
No, that is wrong. First, it doesn't need to be a 100% or all possible markets to count as censorship. For example, forcing library patrons to read a book only in a particular room would be an act of censorship even though the book's overall market isn't affected and people aren't actually being prohibited, even in the library, from reading the book. Suppression counts even if it is partial.
Second, censorship is not just "stopping the game company". Any restriction on availability of a game due to its content is censorship whether or not the censor bears any sort of ill will to the originator of the content.
Back at you.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ilPapa on Sunday June 10 2018, @05:57AM (3 children)
So, what you're saying is that if Breitbart doesn't allow me to post my pro-Socialist column daily on their website that they're censoring me?
Do you have any inkling of the extent of your stupidity?
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday June 10 2018, @11:20AM (2 children)
Why would you have an expectation that your post would end up on their website otherwise? Valve has pretty low hurdles for game publishing once you get past the censored subjects. Breibart has a very restrictive conditions on what they public even once you get past the ideological bias.
I do. You apparently do not.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Monday June 11 2018, @06:31AM (1 child)
But you're calling those restrictive conditions "censorship" when Valve does it, so why isn't it censorship when Breitbart does it?
Weren't you just saying, "Suppression counts even if it is partial." So are you OK with Breitbart's suppression of left-wing thought?
This is why the First Amendment is clear on "congress shall make no law". Because people are allowed to publish what they want, but on their own dime. And when you get into making the definition of censorship all mushy by including private individuals or organizations, you end up devaluing the entire concept of free speech.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 11 2018, @09:38PM
I already stated why. Read the post. Even slavishly following the Breibart ideology (and hence, removing the ideological aspect as a reason for rejection) doesn't guarantee you'll see your words in print. While the non-ideological aspects of the Valve system are minimal and not much of a restriction.
Yes, that is what I said. We call it "bias" not "censorship".
I didn't say it was a First Amendment issue though it can be such. A more likely legal matter is whether the system falsely presented itself as being without significant censorship to get public buy-in and then did a switch-and-bait.
It can also be a First Amendment issue, if this censorship is being done at the behest of the US federal government or the various state and local governments (which are also beholden to the First Amendment), particularly, if being responsive to government requests results in better treatment by the government.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:12PM (1 child)
Thats not censorship, you are trying "bake my cake bigot!" here, valve does not have to do business with anyone.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:38PM
If you actually bothered to read the post - a rare skill, admittedly - you would see that I said that Valve can censor all they want. Because, legally, they can. So, no, I did not advocate for forcing Valve to do anything.
As for it not being censorship, there are definitions of "censorship" that apply to the actions of corporations, so you're just wrong. I'm not sure why some people are so determined to deny that such definitions exist.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:31PM (1 child)
The OP doesn't say anything that suggests he disagrees with you, so nice straw man.
Rather, the OP is saying that Valve has now explicitly accepted responsibility for the content that is posted on its servers. That's a stupid, dangerous position to take; it would have been better to say "We don't take responsibility for the content. We're just a platform; it's up to the users to determine the content with which they'd like to interact, and we'll provide tools to help them avoid what they don't want to see, but we're not going to make decisions for people, because we're completely separate from content."
Valve has associated itself with other people's content. That's a burden they'll regret.
Assholes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:45PM
My post supported the position of the OP. I did not quote any part of the OP or state that I disagree with them. No strawman, just a very direct concurrence. But, nice straw man on your part.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by schad on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:05PM
Thanks, Valve, for having at least a little courage. It probably means more to see this coming from the biggest name instead of one of the also-rans.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:05PM (10 children)
Because we all know that if the owner of a platform chooses to allow as much free speech as possible on that platform, then they are just 'abdicating responsibility'. That also means that SoylentNews is abdicating responsibility, according to the article. Better start censoring, or else.
Who knows what "responsibility" they're abdicating. When someone criticizes a platform for censoring people, others respond by saying 'But they have the legal right to do that!' When a platform decides not to censor very often or at all, some people respond by saying 'Stop abdicating responsibility!' It's maddening.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:31PM (8 children)
So SN should stop banning spammers because SN is censoring them? Is SN restricting the spammers' free speech?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:45PM (3 children)
No, spam is a variant of crap flooding and a technical issue. Likewise with moderation - wearing ear plugs when someone has a habit of screaming in your ear is not censoring them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:03PM (2 children)
You're not just building up a personalized algorithm based on some, say, we of trust made of like minds; rather, you're actively cultivating the reality for someone else, including for those who might disagree with your assessment.
That is, you're going around, trying to stick ear plugs in other people's ears!
Your analogy doesn't hold up, and so you are naturally drawing wrong conclusions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @10:18PM
Moderation is communal and everyone has the choice to browse at -1 therefore the analogy holds. Recall the reluctance with which comments were deleted from the green site back in the day. [slashdot.org]
(Score: 2) by Arik on Sunday June 10 2018, @01:13AM
If that's what they're trying to do they're horribly ineffective at it.
No, I think it's more like they've setup a system where people can share recommendations on brands of earplugs. Or not. As they wish.
First thing I did after making an account was set that threshold down as low as she goes... precisely because I'm not much interested in others recommendations re: earplugs.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:00PM (2 children)
SN doesn't remove spam posts, and it isn't even effective at banning them anyway. That's about as free speech friendly as you can get.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:09PM (1 child)
And thank goodness!
Most of the posts marked "Spam" are nothing of the sort; most of the posts marked "Troll" are nothing of the sort.
Here's the thing, though: If you mark down enough posts from one IP, that IP gets banned from posting here. That is a kind of censorship, then; but, it's just so badly implemented (like everything on this website) that it's ineffective. Soylent News is right for the wrong reasons; it's freedom isn't based on principle, but rather on ineptitude.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @08:15PM
> it's freedom isn't based on principle, but rather on ineptitude.
Give it a rest. Everything around here is based on limited resources. Very limited resources and volunteer labor.
Personally, I believe that the volunteer labor here is top notch! Thanks to all the volunteers!!
(Score: 2) by chromas on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:17PM
I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by darkfeline on Saturday June 09 2018, @10:46PM
Ironically, I think it is the people accusing others of "abdicating responsibility" who are abdicating responsibility. Why be a good parent to your child when you can just blame Valve for hosting violent video games? Why fix the social problems that cause school shootings when you can just blame Valve for hosting a school shooting video game?
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:20PM (4 children)
'It's an Anime Titty Holocaust:' Steam Is Cracking Down on Visual Novels [vice.com]
Steam updates game-content guidelines, will include “something that you hate” [arstechnica.com]
The nightmare of being able to play h-games and edgy shooters. Oh no!!!
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:15PM (3 children)
As a frequent consumer of visual novels, it was somewhat annoying that many of them got delistings or at least warnings after they butchered the games to make it on to steam in the first place. Thankfully I always purchase physical editions and the steam keys are just a courtesy.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Sunday June 10 2018, @12:14AM (1 child)
I guess as a follow-up to this story, I want to know:
1. Are all of the games that got scary letters from Steam now safe?
2. Will they be swept up by Steam's also-vague "straight up trolling" or "things that we decide are illegal" policies?
3. Will they re-enable adult content that had been disabled for Steam?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @08:12PM
I would need to go back and read through the updates, but as I recall, most got notices and then no response or followup. Usually, the VN's will have a separate "adult" patch that can be downloaded from their site. These can either be a real patch that contains the removed material, or a small script that unlocks the content already included in the steam download. The speculation was that the ones that just "hid" the content, rather than actually removed it where what triggered the warning, but again, they claimed to not have recieved any explination or clarification from Valve. Some have since released updates that completely remove any sexual or highly suggestive content, whether it is accessible or not in the defualt install. A lot of the panic came from games that were still in the appproval process, and I have not heard much since the initial scare.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @12:31AM
https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2018/05/gog-com-adds-visual-novels-following-steam-censorship-fiasco/59445/ [oneangrygamer.net]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:29PM (3 children)
I played politically incorrect games like Dopewars, and this crazy game whose name I forgot, where you were an arsonist tht had to burn down government buildings floor by floor without getting your escape route cut off.
Yeah, stuff that the professionally umbraged can take umbrage to, but they are in my memories 30 years later.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:42PM (1 child)
If you like indie and not exactly politically correct games, you might get a kick out of Liberal Crime Squad. Probably not on steam[ing pile] tho...
Its elevator pitch: WARNING: The scope of this game is narrower than that of real life. We have attempted to include foul language, graphic violence, politics, religion, sexual references, adult situations, narcotics, prostitution, bodily functions and bad pickup lines, but Bay 12 Games recognizes that there might be omissions which will make some players uncomfortable. In light of these facts, use your discretion when making decisions about downloading LCS.
http://www.bay12games.com/lcs/ [bay12games.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @02:24AM
That game is ... odd. I've fixed it up and am playing it now.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:52PM
I remember playing "Schoolyard Slaughter" on an Atari 1040ST. I had to get it from an FTP site because mosaic wasn't a thing yet. Clearly still web2.0's fault tho'! Man that game was HARD! Them little kids were QUICK! And you had to get 'em with single headshots too...
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:40PM (3 children)
Nobody with a life would say that.
The mechanism to enforce civic responsibility in our society is civil law.
Says who?
Who is "we", where is the evidence?
No, it's ignoring the calls for censorship.
The world did move forward, evidently Mark Serrels never got the memo. We shouldn't be surprised because regressive, authoritarian policies are rampant in our educational establishments. [youtube.com] The process of deinstitutionalization closed "safe spaces", can we call it social regression to reopen them for the benefit of those demanding "safe spaces" and curation?
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:19PM
CNET Still Lives in the Waking Nightmare of Almost No One Giving a Damn About What They Say.
(Score: 3, Informative) by chromas on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:39PM (1 child)
Valve's video game marketplace Steam is now the anti-App Store [mashable.com]
Steam's new 'anything goes' policy is doomed from the start [pcgamer.com]
Valve’s New Content Policy for Steam Is a Triumph of Cowardice Over Curation [extremetech.com]
Steam's content policy is both arrogant and cowardly [eurogamer.net]
Op-ed: Valve takes a side by not “taking sides” in curation controversy [arstechnica.com]
Valve’s abdication of responsibility over Steam is the worst possible solution [rockpapershotgun.com]
Second Opinion: Valve’s Failure to Moderate Steam is a Problem That’s Going to Get Much Worse [gamerevolution.com]
Valve take a stand against taking a stand on Steam rules [soylentnews.org]
Valve Ignores Its Responsibility with Its New Steam Content Policy [pastemagazine.com]
Butthurt all around!
(Score: 2) by chromas on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:41PM
Looks like I botched that Gamerfuzz [gamerfuzz.com] link. Thanks, Firefox!
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @06:49PM (2 children)
Now let's rename slavery as "actively take responsibility for the behavior and living conditions of workers" while at it
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:09PM (1 child)
Leftists had to come up with a different label for censorship, because they want to stamp out speech they disagree with, but they're supposed to still be the 60's era hippie radicals fighting for free speech against 'the man', or something like that. So as usual, they come up with a different label for what they're doing, since everything is okay when they do it.
(Score: 2) by dry on Sunday June 10 2018, @03:34AM
Don't yo just wish you could ban all leftist speech?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @07:33PM (4 children)
This is not an argument.
This is essentially "Oh my god, people with opinions and tastes I don't like are also using technology, and that means it's evil and must be purged!' It's an emotional reaction to someone opting to promote free expression. If something has content in it that you dislike, you can simply avoid that content.
The bigger problem with Valve's stance is that, without a minimum quality threshold, it makes it exceptionally more difficult to find niche titles. The majority of attention will be grabbed by the truly exceptional titles (things like Cuphead) while niche titles of a more modest quality level will inevitably become buried by the massive quantity of asset flips and general chaff.
Then again, the fact that a title like Doki Doki Literature Club can get relatively wide-spread recognition on Steam is a pretty strong counter-argument to this fear.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Saturday June 09 2018, @08:27PM (3 children)
People can find out about titles on YouTube, forums, blogs, twitter, etc. rather than the gaming "press" or other gatekeepers.
Steam's own algorithms could help labors of love rise to the top and shitty asset flips sink to the bottom. Although games that are not necessarily shitty but are controversial or extremely niche (high amount of dislikes/thumbs down) might struggle.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 09 2018, @09:50PM (2 children)
>extremely niche (high amount of dislikes/thumbs down) might struggle.
Things that attract a lot of attention, positive or negative, benefit from that attention.
The tragically hip will seek out the most hated content just to see what pushes other people's buttons. Like browsing "controversial" on Reddit.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday June 09 2018, @10:42PM (1 child)
Only if they have that option to look for 1:1 likes/dislikes, which is how Reddit's "controversial" works. Or sort by most dislikes or highest dislike ratio to find content that is disliked for reasons other than quality (mixed in with genuinely bad content). Does Steam have these?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:52PM
Dunno, I haven't opened my Steam client in years.
I do wish they'd get KSP running smoothly on modest hardware, though - it looks like a fun waste of time.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 09 2018, @09:45PM (4 children)
Candy crush is pretty clearly on the "all clear" side of objectionable content.
Active shooter is pretty far on the other side, getting close to celebrity-deepfake-incestuous-kiddie-torture-snuff-porn and other things that are illegal and/or unacceptable in most of the world.
So, that leaves Valve (and everyone else) in the position of occasionally stepping up to the plate and saying "no, this one went too far."
The Apple store would seem to take that action too often, often appearing to play favorites for commercial or arbitrary rather than moral reasons.
With global audiences, this kind of thing really calls for local censor boards - if you live in a country that cares, then they should care enough to step up and say what is and isn't acceptable in that country (like the EU is doing for privacy). Somewhere around Web 5.3, we should evolve to local and personal filtering: not just translation of content to the local languages, but some kind of compliance matrix which allows a general content pool to be served up globally with local laws and customs respected. Further, even when jurisdictions aren't involved, there are groups of like-minded individuals who would restrict violent, sexual, profane and other emotionally strong imagery from themselves and/or their children. Content to be labeled by human and/or robot curators for filtering, unlabeled content to be included or excluded at the option of the content receiver...
Or, the whole world could just grow up and start accepting child porn the way that Japan used to before the internet, and everything else along with it, because patterns of light on a screen can't really harm anyone (exceptions for epilepsy triggers, etc.) Care to guess which one is more likely to happen first?
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Captival on Saturday June 09 2018, @10:28PM (1 child)
Except the thing is: murdering prostitutes, killing thousands of people, torture, rape, death - all OK when Grand Theft Auto or Disney owned movie studios do it. Those products make hundreds of millions of dollars so they're fine. It's only when people who giant corporations don't like want to have a voice that the censor-nazis come out to attack.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:49PM
The Disney owned studios dance their multitude of angels on the head of a pin ever so carefully... They have stretched and stretched the definition of fantasy violence to a point where it is acceptable because it is "sufficiently distinguishable from real life that no reasonable person could possibly confuse it with reality" - well, except for the fact that it looks exactly like real life, just with some impossibly super-powered character that the audience so strongly identifies with out of envy that they feel like they are personally backflip roundhouse kicking the ugly mean bad guys heads clean off themselves in 3D IMAX with 30,000 watts of surround sound and now vibrating chairs to boot.
Yeah, irrational double standards backed up by industry lobbyists feeding the public far more socially negative imagery than the amateur commentaries on recent news ever would. The logical extension is that someday you'll have to be an "accredited news source" to comment on any story that involves violence or politically incorrect themes. Pravda, if the USSR had thrived.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Sunday June 10 2018, @12:47AM (1 child)
If Candy Crush Saga is on the safe end of the objectionability spectrum, a game like Columns would probably place similarly. That is, unless its developer made it Columbine-themed for a bad pun. Likewise for a Concentration game (turn over two cards and keep them if their emblems match), unless some sort of camping is involved.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday June 10 2018, @01:01AM
The whole thing gets absurd, right up to the point that a nipple-shield shown during a half-time song and dance sequence is a huge scandal, but Saving Private Ryan is critically acclaimed (and Saving Ryan's Privates raises less controversy than Janet Jackson's costume stunt.)
A lot is about venue, audience, etc. but it all falls apart when you attempt to find any even-handed logic to any of it.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @10:43PM (1 child)
What I find toxic about the "left" is how homophobia is obviously rearing its ugly head. This term is obviously meant to reconstruct attraction to men in people who were not born with a womb as an assault on women instead of as a natural part of human sexuality. I disagree. People without wombs are not sexual servants of womyn-born-womyn. The sum total purpose of the existence of somebody without a womb is not to sexually gratify womyn-born-womyn.
I mean, just look at the attempts to normalize the fallacy of some X are Y, therefore all Y are X. Some alt-righters are homosexual men, therefore all homosexual men are alt-righters. That's propaganda, not some profound conclusion about human sexuality. There was an article in HuffPo somebody linked me the other day that was raising from its grave the notion that homosexual men are pedophilesand that pedophilia and homosexuality (in people without wombs) are fundamentally intertwined (a homosexual with a womb is powerful, not deviant, and people with wombs are, by definition, incapable of pedophilia, even if they are found guilty of rape of a victim without a womb who is under 18 in a court of law.)
I Kant even? Do these terms even mean the same thing to "left"ists that they mean to me? Or have "left"ists gone full retard and completely divorced the idea of a gay man or a trans woman from any definable reality? Are these now just abstract intersectional identities that have nothing to do with lived experience and demonstrable preferences?
How may one prove that one is not an incel? If one is not attracted to women, that's not good enough. If one lacks possession of a womb, the "left" tells us that they must be attracted to women XOR they must needs wish violence upon womyn-born-womyn (woman != womyn-born-womyn). If one demonstrates lack of attraction to women with a sexual history of relationships with people without wombs, that is not good enough, because the entire "incel" theory is gynocentric. No, we need a better word here than gynocentric, because gynocentric here is sloppy. With extensive experience with flesh and blood feminists in real life (you know, that place that doesn't involve the internet), it is easy to determine exactly what is wrong here. Not gynocentricism, but hysteracentricism. The only authentic people according to the view of hysteracentricists are those who have wombs. All other people are unpeople, and further more, if they are not willing sex slaves begging to sexually service womyn-born-womyn morning, afternoon and night then they are obviously and by all accounts incels.
(I'm so livid I've omitted an Oxford comma!)
But perhaps the venerable word chauvinism might apply to this situation. When combined with institutional power, perhaps the word hegemony applies.
What would a lesbian say if we were to presume to dictate her sex life to her. What would a lesbian say if we demand, with a bigoted 24/7 media campaign, that lesbians have sex with men? (Leave me out of this rhetorical world. I have no interest.) Now, watch how quickly my words get twisted around to somehow prove that I'm demanding that lesbians not only have sex with men, but that some lesbians must have sex with me. (Ugh... ugh... just... somebody will use this as evidence of whatever the fuck and once again I have the feeling that I Kant even.)
What about sexual assault against somebody without a womb? It is not fun being violently grabbed by somebody physically stronger than oneself and sexually assaulted. That is fucking humiliation. That is not a damned kink; that is an exercise in power! This is how a womyn-born-womyn demonstrates that she thinks that her victim's body is a goddamned sex toy that is perhaps, in error, inhabited by a thinking, feeling soul. It is not something I will ever feel thankful about or whatever the "left" demands I feel about the experience of being sexually assaulted.
I am wondering if, in light of the "left's" embrace of this kind of bigotry, it makes sense to vote for Republicans. The enemy of my enemy?
Whatever. Might as well check the anon box. This post is going to -1.
(Score: 0, Troll) by takyon on Sunday June 10 2018, @12:05AM
It probably should go to -1. It's off-topic. Put it in a journal. But let me brighten up your day.
Unless your karma is straight up negative, you might as well uncheck the box and post 1 point higher than anon. "What the hell do you have to lose?"
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:21PM (4 children)
It is like everyone forgot about Super Columbine Massacre RPG [wikipedia.org]. It came out in 2005, not exactly Web 2.0
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday June 10 2018, @12:08AM
Rather than forgetting about it, it's more like the same censorship and media sensationalism tendencies are coming into play. Except that with Steam as the gatekeeper for many gamers, censoring a title from the platform could hurt the title's revenue and/or exposure (or invoke the Streisand effect, on a case-by-case basis).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday June 10 2018, @12:28AM
As an addendum, one difference is that with Super Columbine Massacre the loudest voices were CNN, Washington Post, and other old media outlets, whereas the current whining at Valve is driven by Kotaku [kotaku.com], Polygon [polygon.com], Vice [vice.com] and other usual suspects.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Sunday June 10 2018, @03:51AM (1 child)
whats kind of sad about that game was it was removed from some summit/competition/festival thing. I get how it can be shocking for people to see that game. But guess what, too bad. and if they don't like it they can ignore it or go by the booth and tell everyone off if they want (though I can see that raising security and therefor liability concerns. Maybe the lawyers are more responsible for the rise of the sjws/cocs/*gates than the "liberals"). whatever. They'll be judged accordingly and rightfully so.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @08:26PM
Yes, as I recall Super Columbine Massacre RPG was an intentionally inflammatory title, but the actual game took the subject matter fairly seriously and treated it very factually rather than glorifiying or bowdlerizing the situation. Mostly it was an attempt to actually expand the medium into social commentary, much in line with the "are video games art" debate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @03:06PM (2 children)
WTF?
We're blaming web 2.0 for this crap? Why?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @04:24PM
Muh soggy knees!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @06:55PM
'blaming' web 2.0 is a way to deflect blame from themselves and their failures. They assumed that they were smart. Then since they were smart they then assumed they could fix everything. Then they assumed that their ideas were 100% better than everyone else. They did not react well to 'hey the emperor is naked' and are now going on to blame everything on everyone else except for their failed polices which they continue to push on us. Then try to gaslight us and make us double and triple check "yep he is buck naked". Even then they will not let it go. Because 'they are smart and you are stupid ipso facto that man has a beautiful set of cloths on'. The other facet of this is 'find the stupidest thing a politician says and mock them forever for it'. Which is just other 'smart' people trying to manipulate the conversation.
It is a form of cognitive bias where you are smart in one area and then assume that your smarts correlate to other areas. Take me for example. If you want someone to crack out a program or fix your computer in some way I probably can manage that and do a decent job at it. May take a little longer than you thought but it will be done correctly and work pretty good. Want me to build you a house? I have some ideas (because I have a bit of training in it), but in no way do you want me building you a house. You want to find a decent architect and a building firm. I am at least cognizant enough that i can sometimes see it. But I too can be blinded by my bias and fall into the trap all the time.
Apparently the most deadly enemy for someone who is kinda smart? The words "I do not know". Once you free yourself from the shackles that you know everything you can begin to realize you have a hell of a lot to learn.
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/06/the-smart-are-more-biased-to-think-they-are-less-biased.html [overcomingbias.com]
So blaming web 2.0 for this sort of thing? Not surprising. They like to blame people and ideas for their own failures. In this case they thought they had control of 2.0 and only their ideas were worth hearing. Well they gave everyone a podium to shout whatever idea they came up with. Not all of those ideas will perfectly fit yours. So therefore web 2.0 is a failure because it let OTHER people come up with ideas.
(Score: 1) by garrulus on Monday June 11 2018, @08:13AM
The degree to which people on this thread go along with this SJW language and concepts is shocking and gay.