7 ms·

A platform whose audience is mostly teenagers is the wrong place to ban streamers actively promoting gambling? How is that even remotely censorship?

by qsort 4y ago

causi 4y ago
It is censorship. It's just entirely reasonable censorship as Twitch is a private company and can choose not to host whatever it pleases.
- matai_kolila 4y ago
  It's only censorship in the sense that all rules are "censorship" which IMO removes the value of having a distinct word. A meaningful definition would highlight the desire to suppress a point of view, and you're going to have a hard time justifying "gambling as a point of view", because it's not really a position on an issue.
  - causi 4y ago
    It's only censorship in the sense that all rules are "censorship" which IMO removes the value of having a distinct word. It's censorship in the sense that things are censored, i.e., prevented from being shown or communicated, which is the definition of the word "censorship". Putting a black bar over someone's genitals or bleeping profanity is also censorship. It's just not government censorship, and therefore has no relation to freedom of speech.
    - matai_kolila 4y ago
      ...I'm trying to explain how that definition is kind of useless, as literally every rule is censorship if we use it. The text box here being limited to 5000 chars (or w/e size it actually is) would be censorship under that definition. The fact that I can't also upload audio to HN would be censorship. Does acoustic physics censor me because I can't yell loudly enough for everyone to hear my views on how to cook pasta correctly (salt, the secret is salt)? I just don't find those things to be in the same category as a government arresting protestors, for example, and I don't find Twitch banning otherwise illegal gambling content to be in that same category, either.
      - causi 4y ago
        Fair enough, I amend my statement. It's censorship in the sense that things are censored, i.e., *deliberately* prevented from being shown or communicated based on their informational content. I just don't find those things to be in the same category as a government arresting protestors, for example, Correct; that is government censorship. There is not, however, a qualitative difference between Twitch deciding to ban one behavior from being depicted over another, whether it be gambling, nudity, racism, or people doing that trick with their spit where they let it stretch down several inches and suck it back into their mouths. I'm not seeing a real "point of view" being expressed here, which IMO is also an important part of censorship. Well your opinion disagrees with the dictionary. I don't know what to tell you.
        matai_kolila 4y ago
        But that's still part of the problem; I'm not seeing a real "point of view" being expressed here, which IMO is also an important part of censorship. Because I'm having a hard time believing "watch me gamble on sites that I'm not legally allowed to gamble on" really qualifies as "a point of view" or "expression" in a meaningful sense (though yes, I bet if we pulled out our Webster's Dictionaries we could squeeze the definition into this conversation somehow).
    - YurgenJurgensen 4y ago
      But it's not. You can still show or communicate the same things as before, as long as the underlying activity isn't actual gambling. Financial transactions aren't speech.
- donatj 4y ago
  In my eyes, the only thing justifiable to censor in all of life is "think of the children" arguments. They are always baseless calls to emotion. A kid watches gambling, what's the harm? They're gambling in school, it's a tail as old as time. Magic cards, pokémon cards, pogs, marbles. They all have aspects of gambling.
ciabattabread 4y ago
It technically is, it’s just that we normally use censorship to describe government actions. Their platform, their rules.
- hunterb123 4y ago
  Well no, they're banning gambling on stream in some regions to meet government regulations.
desindol 4y ago
It's an easy exploitable market you hear a lot arguing to open up markets like that under the almighty umbrella of "free speech™".
IncandescentGas 4y ago
Do you have data suggesting twitch auidences are mostly teenagers? According to GlobalWebIndex in Q2 2019, this is an approximation of the age demographic on Twitch, ranging in age from 16-64 years in age: 16 to 24 year olds: 41% 25 to 34 year olds: 32% 35 to 44 year olds: 17% 45 to 54 year olds: 7% 55 to 64 year olds: 3%
- matai_kolila 4y ago
  The stats I found seem to suggest nearly zero under-18 use Twitch, which I think we all know is a lie... From https://www.streamscheme.com/twitch-statistics/ https://www.streamscheme.com/twitch-statistics/: > In 2022 the age demographic on Twitch is as follows: > 18 to 24-year-olds: 35.85% > 25 to 34 year-olds: 32.14% > 35 to 44-year-olds: 15.33% > 45 to 54-year-olds: 8.62% > 55 to 64-year-olds: 4.97%
- xnyan 4y ago
  No offense to GlobalWebIndex, but garbage data in garbage data out. There's no possible way that 0% of Twitch viewership is under 16 (go to literally any school or place with children under 16 and casually observe their screens). Children have been lying about their age on the internet since the beginning of the internet. Any service that says no children are using it without very sold proof is ignorant or lying.
Flankk 4y ago

A platform whose audience is mostly teenagers is the wrong place to ban streamers actively promoting gambling? How is that even remotely censorship?

by qsort 4y ago

A platform whose audience is mostly teenagers is the wrong place to ban streamers actively promoting gambling? How is that even remotely censorship?

causi 4y ago

It is censorship. It's just entirely reasonable censorship as Twitch is a private company and can choose not to host whatever it pleases.

matai_kolila 4y ago
It's only censorship in the sense that all rules are "censorship" which IMO removes the value of having a distinct word. A meaningful definition would highlight the desire to suppress a point of view, and you're going to have a hard time justifying "gambling as a point of view", because it's not really a position on an issue.
- causi 4y ago
  It's only censorship in the sense that all rules are "censorship" which IMO removes the value of having a distinct word. It's censorship in the sense that things are censored, i.e., prevented from being shown or communicated, which is the definition of the word "censorship". Putting a black bar over someone's genitals or bleeping profanity is also censorship. It's just not government censorship, and therefore has no relation to freedom of speech.
  - matai_kolila 4y ago
    ...I'm trying to explain how that definition is kind of useless, as literally every rule is censorship if we use it. The text box here being limited to 5000 chars (or w/e size it actually is) would be censorship under that definition. The fact that I can't also upload audio to HN would be censorship. Does acoustic physics censor me because I can't yell loudly enough for everyone to hear my views on how to cook pasta correctly (salt, the secret is salt)? I just don't find those things to be in the same category as a government arresting protestors, for example, and I don't find Twitch banning otherwise illegal gambling content to be in that same category, either.
    - causi 4y ago
      Fair enough, I amend my statement. It's censorship in the sense that things are censored, i.e., *deliberately* prevented from being shown or communicated based on their informational content. I just don't find those things to be in the same category as a government arresting protestors, for example, Correct; that is government censorship. There is not, however, a qualitative difference between Twitch deciding to ban one behavior from being depicted over another, whether it be gambling, nudity, racism, or people doing that trick with their spit where they let it stretch down several inches and suck it back into their mouths. I'm not seeing a real "point of view" being expressed here, which IMO is also an important part of censorship. Well your opinion disagrees with the dictionary. I don't know what to tell you.
      - matai_kolila 4y ago
        But that's still part of the problem; I'm not seeing a real "point of view" being expressed here, which IMO is also an important part of censorship. Because I'm having a hard time believing "watch me gamble on sites that I'm not legally allowed to gamble on" really qualifies as "a point of view" or "expression" in a meaningful sense (though yes, I bet if we pulled out our Webster's Dictionaries we could squeeze the definition into this conversation somehow).
  - YurgenJurgensen 4y ago
    But it's not. You can still show or communicate the same things as before, as long as the underlying activity isn't actual gambling. Financial transactions aren't speech.
donatj 4y ago
In my eyes, the only thing justifiable to censor in all of life is "think of the children" arguments. They are always baseless calls to emotion. A kid watches gambling, what's the harm? They're gambling in school, it's a tail as old as time. Magic cards, pokémon cards, pogs, marbles. They all have aspects of gambling.

ciabattabread 4y ago

It technically is, it’s just that we normally use censorship to describe government actions. Their platform, their rules.

hunterb123 4y ago
Well no, they're banning gambling on stream in some regions to meet government regulations.

desindol 4y ago

It's an easy exploitable market you hear a lot arguing to open up markets like that under the almighty umbrella of "free speech™".

IncandescentGas 4y ago

Do you have data suggesting twitch auidences are mostly teenagers? According to GlobalWebIndex in Q2 2019, this is an approximation of the age demographic on Twitch, ranging in age from 16-64 years in age: 16 to 24 year olds: 41% 25 to 34 year olds: 32% 35 to 44 year olds: 17% 45 to 54 year olds: 7% 55 to 64 year olds: 3%

matai_kolila 4y ago
The stats I found seem to suggest nearly zero under-18 use Twitch, which I think we all know is a lie... From https://www.streamscheme.com/twitch-statistics/ https://www.streamscheme.com/twitch-statistics/: > In 2022 the age demographic on Twitch is as follows: > 18 to 24-year-olds: 35.85% > 25 to 34 year-olds: 32.14% > 35 to 44-year-olds: 15.33% > 45 to 54-year-olds: 8.62% > 55 to 64-year-olds: 4.97%
xnyan 4y ago
No offense to GlobalWebIndex, but garbage data in garbage data out. There's no possible way that 0% of Twitch viewership is under 16 (go to literally any school or place with children under 16 and casually observe their screens). Children have been lying about their age on the internet since the beginning of the internet. Any service that says no children are using it without very sold proof is ignorant or lying.

Flankk 4y ago