They are with citizens united. They got full speech rights. The corporations said FUCK YOU BITCH. MY VOICE IS LOUDER. I GOTS THE PAPER STACKS. WHY YOU JELLY BROKE ASS MOTHER FUCKER? EAT A SACK OF BABY DICKS.Corporations are not people.
Oh, well we're done here.
Corporations are not people.
It always amused me. I wonder in what world underage prepubescent girls have double D cups. I guess the same as Kotaku's.they personally don't like "borderline pedo" games.
Imagine if Chinese censors made an American game developer based in the US censor their work for the US market, and conduct their content inspections in Mandarin at 4am in the morning.
Imagine if Chinese censors made an American game developer based in the US censor their work for the US market, and conduct their content inspections in Mandarin at 4am in the morning.
I wonder what Mr. Screier thinks about the kissing scene of two 14 year old girls in The Last of Us: Left Behind.
Do we have a review of his on the DLC?
I'm surprised Catherine: Full Body is still planned for PS4. If they will have to make cuts before the final release, let's hope it increases our chances for a port to another console/PC..
It goes in line with their agenda actually, the censorship that is, but they know they are a vocal minority, and can't openly celebrate such travesty lest the ire of the majority squelches this pathetic small victory.https://www.change.org/p/sony-towards-sony-their-new-policies
The petition just got 2000 more signatures suddenly after this news and i see a lot of Japanese names signing. i guess Japanese gamers are now fighting this new censorship policies with us.
Im not surprised that most of the gaming journalist sites are ignoring this censorship news because they cannot push their agenda this time.
Sony already committed more than 3 strikes:If I hear they censored Full Body because of Sony then it's strike 2. 3 Strikes and fuck a PS5. Missing out on great games because I don't like the company behind them isn't new to me. I might not have a lot of morality left, but I have enough to stand against this nonsense.
Sony already committed more than 3 strikes:
1. They caved into the left authoritarian mob and barred Super Seducer from being sold on PSN.
2. After Omega Labyrinth Z passed through ESRB, SIE banned the game from release in NA and Europe.
3. Sony forced XSEED to delay Senran Kagura Re:Newal's western release to remove the intimacy mode when the feature was in previous games without problems. The Playstation UK Twitter account's response to the criticisms against this censorship was condescending to the consumers.
4. Of course, the topic of this thread. Forcing Japanese developers to censor their games in Japan as well as having to communicate with Playstation HQ in English during US west coast business hours is ludicrous.
Pretty sad that Western devs aren't sticking up for their Japanese counter-parts.
Also, I noticed that people don't care about censorship unless it affects them.
Sad, but not surprising. I wouldn't have expected them to even think about defending Japanese developers because most of them are already deeply infused in identity politics and whatnot.Pretty sad that Western devs aren't sticking up for their Japanese counter-parts.
Also, I noticed that people don't care about censorship unless it affects them.
Why would they? They make pervy garbage. Western devs make beautiful LGTBKJUDFHIUOSW+ friendly art. Underage interracial lesbian girls kissing is beautiful and brave.Pretty sad that Western devs aren't sticking up for their Japanese counter-parts.
Also, I noticed that people don't care about censorship unless it affects them.
But again, nobody is guaranteed a platform or the right to communicate with the masses, just that the government won't interrupt your right to freedom of speech. He can say what he wants, and if he needs a place from which to spread his words out far and none of the current carriers wish to be associated with him, he is fully within his legal rights to start his own.
Those carriers have freedom of speech as well, and this extends to who they wish to have on their service.
They aren't being disenfranchised, they still have methods with which to spread their message. However, if people find their message to be repulsive and no longer wish to support it, then that's within their rights. You can say that it seems wrong, but the only possible way to make it "right" would be a complete violation of freedom of speech rights.
As for the second part you mentioned, racism against white men is different, due to history and how these comments punch. Punching up is different than punching down, and is treated differently. That being said, there have been examples of people being fired for anti-white racism and comments, but it's usually more direct. Saying something like "all white people are evil" or "I hate all white people" is wrong and racist; saying, "White men have been behind laws in the country that discriminate and disenfranchise." is not.
The "folks" they are referring to are the ISP's, not the individual companies such as Paypal or Youtube. Again, I'm not fully versed in what laws utilities have to follow, but the sole idea behind net neutrality has nothing to do with content, but the idea that all data should be treated equally, with the ISP's passing a random webpage to you with the same speed and priority as Google or Netflix.
It's to prevent something like this
from happening.
I've not heard an
snip
race and religion.
They aren't, but they are treated as such ever since the concept of "Corporate Personhood" became a thing.
And yes, they seem to have more rights than actual people (even though they are not supposed to).
Wow, this thread really went off on a tangent.
So who decides who is 'toxic' and who isn't? Is starving wikileaks of donations a good thing for example? You don't see how this is a slippery slope? The point of free speech is to protect the speech of the outsiders otherwise there is no need for free speech protections.
& having a handful of American corporations controlling global communication sounds real shitty. Their control of US communication and de-platforming viewpoints is one of the main reasons the US has been at constant war for 20 years, that there are no anti-war candidates, and nobody talks about how their economy needs war to function.
You have a funny way of spelling "left wing politics force speech codes on society which then forces corporations which then force it on people and literally decide on a case by case basis depending on the person "is he a lefty or a righty? male or female?" because toxic means whatever anyone wants it to mean. Deliberately undefined words that anyone can build their castle walls around, its bullshit, it was always bullshit since liberals forced this crap on everyone and it will remain bullshit in the future as well.People decide who is toxic and who isn't.
Why the left of course. The left decides what is racist and what is sexist. The left decides who is allowed to be shit on (white males) and who is sacred.So who decides who is 'toxic' and who isn't?
You forgot the part where corporations may be subject to government regulation, especially if those corporations are of the public utility strain...At the end of the day, corporations are all about money. If the public rejects your ass for being too much of a shitheel, then the corporations will find you too toxic to want to deal with, to want to associate with, to want to do business with. You can blame anyone you want for this, any ideology you want for this, but what you can't do is wish it away.
You forgot the part where corporations may be subject to government regulation, especially if those corporations are of the public utility strain...
They are private corporations who may be subject to government regulation, that's the point.That only really counts in terms of utilities however, which is one of the reasons why I really hope Net Neutrality comes back. So that the flow of data can be treated same as the flow of water or electricity. That being said, Facebook, Twitter, and Paypal are not public utilities, they are private corporations with competition. Still, Republicans were always all for the government not interfering in the day to day of private companies until it started negatively affecting them.
They are private corporations who may be subject to government regulation, that's the point.
The better question would be how does this circle back to the topic of this thread?In what way and for what reason? There's a difference between what happened to Microsoft per se and what might theoretically happen to Facebook or Twitter, especially nowadays.
The better question would be how does this circle back to the topic of this thread?
I assumed there is an overarching point you were trying to make. If you don't have one, then you should've just taken the conversation to PM.I'm willing to drop it whenever, but people (you included) keep bringing it back up. You have questions, I have answers. When the questions stop, so do the responses.
I wonder how many people that were shrugging off Dead or Alive 6's fanservice toning down when it was announced, and even praising Team Ninja for it, were shitting on Team Ninja for what they did with Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 on PS3 compared to Ninja Gaiden II on 360 for the massive censoring of violence?This here is one thing that bugs me the most. Over on ReeeeeEra and other outlets I saw a ton of people agreeing with this new policy, but I bet as soon as it came to something they actually like they would make a big stink about it.
The greater the IQ the likelier an agent is to support free speech. Posthumans will be immortal, have greater intellectual capacity than any man, and have power enough to overpower any nation. If they decide to protect free speech, no nation will be able to restrict free speech.They are also immortal. Puny human, you don't stand a chance.
They have a special protection called safe harbor, that means they can't be held liable for content posted in their platforms. If they exercise editorial control, they are publishers and should lose that protection.What would the other option be?
The same companies that allow, misandrist speech, antiwhite racist speech, and violent activists on the left.At the end of the day, corporations are all about money. If the public rejects your ass for being too much of a shitheel, then the corporations will find you too toxic to want to deal with, to want to associate with, to want to do business with. You can blame anyone you want for this, any ideology you want for this, but what you can't do is wish it away.
The greater the IQ the likelier an agent is to support free speech. Posthumans will be immortal, have greater intellectual capacity than any man, and have power enough to overpower any nation. If they decide to protect free speech, no nation will be able to restrict free speech.
They have a special protection called safe harbor, that means they can't be held liable for content posted in their platforms. If they exercise editorial control, they are publishers and should lose that protection.
Every copyright violation, every call to violence, every shooter or violent activist they've allowed, revenge porn, etc they should be held liable.
The same companies that allow, misandrist speech, antiwhite racist speech, and violent activists on the left.
You should lose safe harbor if you do not support free speech.
Jones was having record breaking sales, his app was rapidly reaching top 5 if not number one news app before deplatforming. lose 80%? more like BS.First off, it's not legal reasons why these companies choose to deplatform. They do it because the public at large has rejected these people and those who do business with them. If doing business with Alex Jones means you lose 80% of your customers, then why do business with Alex Jones?
As for part two, these companies kick people like that off all the time. Hell, Twitter is known for having the problem of allowing Neo-nazis on their platform with no restrictions, but blocking/ignoring people who complain about them.
but you will find gta and game of thrones.And the most money almost always comes from the biggest audience. And if you want to keep it, sometimes you got to ixnay the products and audience the general population considers unsavoury.
Just like Walmart. Huge store that sells products to everyone. You won't find a porn mag on their shelves.