|
Jippa posted:Do you think there will be a mass exodus to twitch tv? Twitch ain't gonna take these guys. They're already past YouTube when it come to managing content like that. If it isn't gaming related, or one of the few carve outs for related stuff, it's shutdown pretty quick. Most likely vid.me is going to be the initial landing zone. Those guys have been trying to start a partnership program and seem to try and capitalize on the various controversies on YouTube lately. But, that's more about things like the recommended algorithms and being more open about their system. I don't think they're trying to be an altright haven.
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 13:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 08:07 |
|
|
temple posted:If h3h3 had any self-reflection or shame they would remove that video. They copied someone's pee themed content, recreated it, and complain they are't making the same money. That is Ethan's model anyway. I would tolerate, even respect him, if he did that alone. But instead, he grandstands about free speech when its really about making money for no effort. Yeah, I liked H3H3's videos where he really goes out an debunks some of the worse channels. Especially the prank nation guy and the joey salads douche who was hiring actors to act as racist caricatures so he could try and bank off racists getting their hate on. His other stuff, the "humor", I just didn't care for. It wasn't like the all stars in this thread at least, and was just kinda dumb fun for him. He's in with that whole Filthy Frank/IDubz group which just ain't my speed, but I can't really hate on him any more than the other cringe/gross-out/experimental humor stuff on Adult Swim. Well, except for Idubbz weird obsession with saying the "niggerfaggot". But these last few months you can tell he's just getting scared about his "lifestyle" collapsing in on him. It's also pretty funny since this is babies first lesson in broadcast brand cultivation. If you're going to try and make content that will turn off advertisers or hosting sites or media groups, then you need to have a back up plan to keep the lights on. No poo poo if you're out there blasting that "All blacks commit more crime" or specialize in content designed in piss people off, you might have to deal with losing money or access to the platform. Hell, other genres of video on youtube already know how to deal with this. The TeamFourStar guys, who do DBZ parodies, have known this forever. So they have back ups of their videos on their own private site and revenue streams beyond ad money, especially since they don't put ads on their DBZ videos in the first place. EVERYONE ELSE HAS LEARNED THIS LESSON GUYS! Even better: They're not even shutting the channels down. Just not paying them for that content, which is 100% the advertisers rights. It's not even youtube forcing ads off of those videos, they gave the advertisers the ability to choose who they want to associate with, and surprise, surprise.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:well they just need to do what the mommy bloggers do and tout sponsors on their channel I mean, unironically yes. At least in the sense that is what they're going to have to do if they want revenue now. I've seen plenty of other channels do it. Getting in video sponsors, like traditional radio ads, or doing a patreon is the way you need to go if you're going to try and survive now. That being said I hope they get stonewalled by those advertisers as well, and that their scum sucking audience are too flaky to support them via direct donations.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
A surprisingly interesting look at this "adpocolypse" from SA's favorite son: https://soundcloud.com/totalbiscuit/h3h3-productions-and-the-state-of-youtube-advertising
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Visidan posted:Wellllll, you could say he deserved the ban for daring people to do it on a livestream with twenty thousand teenage viewers after revealing the gate number he was at. Fucker needs to be thankful he didn't get himself or someone else killed. How dumb can you be.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What the hell is pussypass? Is that a subgenre of MGTOW? Reddit subforum. TL;DR: There's a circle of amger/revenge porn subforums with various specific topics. r/RevengePorn, r/PettyRevenge, r/MaliciousCompliance, r/prorevenge, r/JusticePorn, etc, etc. There's ever more specific ones dealing with road rage revenge, video game revenge, and so on. Some of these have been banned, like RevengePorn, for going too far or breaking reddit's seemingly only real rule: Don't go after real people (for too long, or at least to explicitly). r/PussyPass and r/PussyPassDenied are two such subforums that cater specifically to revenge porn relating to women So they both started out of the "mens rights" and red pill pool of misogynistic victim mentality hand wringing. Then when the alt-right started becoming an explicit thing, instead of just a loose collection of equally detestable groups on the internet, the red pills got mixed in with the Nazis and what was supposed to just a place for posting about "evil women getting shown up" turned into a literal Neo-Nazi subforum. Turns out one of the mods who came to inherit the page decided that this was the right thing to do and announced the move by redoing the page's CSS to celebrate Hitler's Birthday. Explicitly. With Nazi banners and the Top banner reading "Happy Birthday Mien Furer" in German. And adding a "Fascist Goy Reading List" to further "red pill" these simple misogynists into full on Nazis. And if you were asking just specifically about the term "Pussy Pass" it's like the "race card"but about women using their gender as an excuse to get away with "stuff".
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Burn Reddit to the loving ground and Just a slight change.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:oh it was way more than that, that thread was just the first one on the archive.is listings with the swastika in the sidebar that was there when I emailed the admins Oh man. I should have known it went further...
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:please leave me /r/corgi to browse in peace, thanks No. There are better sources for cute animal pictures. I've since sworn off reddit (the open Nazi Subs post election is what finally did it), and my friends keep saying stuff like that. "Just ignore the lovely subs and stick with the fun ones". And to me that's like saying "sure I hate the KKK, but the local chapter has a mean pancake breakfast".
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:i guess you haven't read gbs lately No I haven't. Let me have my ignorant hypocrisy.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
Forceholy posted:The problem with reddit is that shutting down problem subreddits is like cutting the heads of a hydra. When you ban one, more will take their place, usually by alt-righters taking over other subreddits or going on voat. Besides, you don't need much to create a subreddit anyway. That's only really a problem when you also take a very lax site wide moderating stance and have no controls over who can make new subforums, accounts, and for selecting mods for those forums. Which it should be of no surprise reddit also does.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:
This is the big point. "I was joking" always comes after people like this get in trouble. Pug dude wanted to hurt his ex and thought he could also get some attention and youtube money out of it. Once poo poo got bad he tried to slam the "prank" button but the UK law doesn't actually care about that, or at the very least the judge doesn't care to just dismiss it. Here's a pretty good breakdown of why these defenses are bullshit, but not directed at this guy or actually being antagonistic against those who use it in bad faith (it specifically relates to the Pewdiepie fiverr scandal). It's actually a breakdown of "how to avoid completely loving up your controversial joke and getting a media firestorm after your rear end if you're famous enough to garner one". But It still applies I think. Linked to the relevant bit, since it also goes into some youtube sorting algorithm stuff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxphJ-dnX2Y&t=228s TLDW: These kinds of events don't start out as "jokes", they are attacks designed to make a group the target of ridicule. When someone like Pug dude, or some alt-right rear end in a top hat, says "PC Culture has made it so we can't take a joke anymore" what they mean is "I can't just ridicule and wantonly attack this group for fun anymore". There's no set up, turn, punchline, the whole joke is just "[outgroup] is a bunch of subhumans, let's laugh at them". And laughter is only the outcome if you're already on the same page as the "comedian". Additionally the sources aren't comedians. They're just commentators who switch hats constantly. In one video they could be legitimately arguing for the re-enslavement of black people, then in another make an off handed joke about slavery that they get in trouble for, which they proceed to defend as "just a joke". The difference between Sargon making claiming a (hypothetical) Nazi salute in a picture is a joke and John Cleese in Fawlty Towers goosestepping while throwing the Nazi salute is that one is an established environment where jokes are expected and the other is just some guy with no context beyond "being an arsehole". Then there's the classic Punching down vs Punching Up. Don't need to go too far with this I hope. But the target of the joke, the greater social context, matters. And finally: Consequences matter. If a 15 year old set out to prank his friend at a sleepover by setting off a firecracker while he slept and ends up burning his house down, killing the friend and their family, which ends up leading to a wildfire that sweeps through a rural community destroying homes and businesses: It no longer matters that it started as a prank. Extreme hyperbole? Yes it is, but once a joke moves beyond it's initial confines it has transformed into something else. Even if it was legitimately constructed as a joke, told in a classic set up-turn-punchline format, and delivered in an environment where the joke is expected. A bad joke can become the spark that starts a larger social conversation about the topic. I know that's not very short for a tl:dw, but the video is 20 minutes so...
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Everyone's also latching onto the greatest possible punishment as if it's the only punishment. Yes, the guy got arrested, but that's because it is a criminal statute and not just a simple fine that they mail you. Also it was created in an era that didn't account for you to be able to meet the criteria of the law from the privacy of your own home. Probably created to deal with people going nuts in the town square, not idiots on youtube. Most likely the guy'll just get a slap on the wrist legally. The biggest complaint he has is the social fallout.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:it makes him look like a big fat pansy bawwwing about the sudden realization that his decisions in life have consequences he has to deal with That's all that this comes down too. Dude did thing without thinking, upset at result. Should what he did qualify as a crime? Hmm, maybe. Maybe not. But that's not what y'all're arguing about.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Do... do you think I'm a vampire? That's also not how you kill vampires. Distract them maybe, in some traditions. But not kill them.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Midig posted:The word joke might have been a bit broad, but puns are out of the selection and so are jokes that are cool to share at work. So....you're going to just straight up disqualify any joke that's not hurtful.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Lovechop posted:this isn't true for myself, or a fair few other people i know, but i think we've got some very different experiences here so i'll agree to disagree on this one. I don't think boner is making the point right, but I see the argument as basically being: People frivolously putting themselves into an identity at odds with a large portion of society by design, only to later lament these choices and instead of fixing the cause of the problem they rail against the consequence. In the piercing example it comes down to kids wanting to rebel against society's ideas of acceptable presentation, only to then realize that for a lot of jobs you can't look like a bad 90s comic character. And instead of just removing the piercings or accepting that it's going to cost money to remove tattoos/reconstruct body mods, they rail against people not liking their choice of aesthetics. Which, granted, might be a fine thing to push back against so it's not the best example. But you can apply it to things like being an alt-right ( or white supremacist or Nazi) as well. These people choose to be a part of a group that seeks to offend and attack large portions of society, and then once society says "yep, enough of that then" and pushes back via getting fired, being charged with an offense, etc they just don't want the consequence. At the same time though, the alt-right example works better because the explicit goal of their ideology in many cases is to offend. Like what the gently caress is the point of using a slur, or directly invoking Nazi imagery at a Jew person, or as they explicitly state time and again, trying to trigger snowflakes, if not to get a bad reaction from people. The consequence that they rail against here is that people do not like them, do not want to associate with them, and do not want to give them a platform to continue harassing others AND WELL NO poo poo! That was your goal! All they really want is a small, politically impotent group that they have carte blanche permission to attack.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:My partner and sister-in-law both have visible tattoos, are in their 30s, and have white collar "respectable" jobs for the government/contracting. I think it depends on the field, I can't imagine going on interviews with visible tattoos. There's also a difference between having visible tattoos in work attire and, well, something like this:  If you're going to go with something like that...well you're just going to have to be that much better of a candidate for a given job.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:puglad. I think we've wandered into another PDP-style derail where a group of posters are arguing about something without reading about it. According to the Daily Mail they are looking at this as an offense under The Communications Act of 2003 Dunno which part, I'm scrolling through now to see if anything jumps out.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Midig posted:Well, not necessarily attacking someone. But dealing with difficult subjects. Now you're moving the goal posts.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:Oh here they say: Ah, well there you go. So basically violating broadcast standards.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
loving lol. So it seems like the dude hosed up and basically guaranteed himself a guilty judgement: Communications Act 2003 - Section 127 posted:
 This is why you don't say poo poo without talking to a lawyer.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Lovechop posted:what kind of defence is that, anyway? i don't know what kind of maniac goes to that amount of effort just to annoy their girlfriend. i sing pop songs off key, works an absolute treat. Originally I thought he was doing this to an ex-girlfriend, which made somewhat more sense even if it's a little odd to have that much access to your ex's dog. But yeah that too reeks of "Think of something think of something...I GOT IT! Wait poo poo that's made it worse..."
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I believe that was his initial and fairly immediate statement when this first gained media attention, before he was arrested, it is quite possibly sincere. Maybe, but it's still telling that his defense is "I was TRYING to be an rear end in a top hat".
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
Midig posted:They exist. They just tend to be really boring and are reserved for forced interactions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTcRRaXV-fg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyKD4KagqbA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZGYrMwqU_A 
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Midig posted:Wait, Jim Carrey is still considered funny? I though we let all the bad poo poo from the 2000s behind. Still a good joke that's not "really boring and are reserved for forced interactions." Which is the point I'm making.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Midig posted:
You can spend the rest of the day deflecting and trying to shift the goalposts or you can just admit you made a bad argument. "Comedy can be hurtful and still be funny" is a defensible argument that can actually be applied to the situation we were talking about. "Most comedy is hurtful and anything that isn't is just puns or bad watercooler talk and forced interactions no one wants" is not.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Take note everybody, this is what the top keks of 4chan will do to your mind. Abbot & Costello's greatest bit can make this broke-brained idiot smirk on a good day. But not nearly as much as calling a Jewish person a kike while having your specially trained dog bark at him while giving the Bellamy salute. Or reposting the same A. Wyatt Mann comics over and over again with new poo poo MSpainted ontop. WampaLord posted:To play Devil's Advocate, the "Who's On First" routine's humor is derived from making fun of Asian names, so it's not exactly an example of innocent humor. uh. You literally never watched or hear the actual bit have you? They're not making fun of Asian names. Crain fucked around with this message at 21:24 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Oh poo poo really? No. quote:Abbott: Oh, I'll tell you their names, but you know it seems to me they give these ball players now-a-days very peculiar names. "What" and "I don't know" Aren't asian names. The joke is literally that those 3 players have odd names that aren't names.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:The other players are Tomorrow, Today, Why, and I Don't Give A Darn. I don't think those are Asian names either. Yeah this is one of those cases where someone was looking for an angle that just isn't there.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:this was a thing not too long ago so it's probably easy to misunderstand the who's on first routine. a lot of vaudville was based in absurd misunderstandings Much like this other classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MS2aEfbEi7s Which conveniently also manages to
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:That's probably why the dog isn't the one being punished. Not by the state at least.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
LanceHunter posted:Speaking of Lindsay Ellis, she just posted another video, breaking down Mel Brook's satire of Nazis and other controversial subjects (and completely dismantling the edge-lord "Mel Brooks could do it, why can't I?" argument). This is really good. But I can't help but see the age old problem cropping up in it of "A lie can get around the world before the truth can get it's shoes on". That's a solid dive into just why the haphazard defense of "It's a joke/satire/parody/ur PC cuck snoflak" people use once they get in trouble doesn't actually work. The problem is it took 40 min to get there. While shorter explanations are available, this goes the extra mile to provide context and really work through the problem step by step, and it really needs to do so.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
business hammocks posted:This seems implausible. Lots of scholarship predates the 80s, and political scientists and philosophers have been fixated on the hows and whys since the 50s. Plus in the realm of the arts alone you have Judgment at Nuremberg and The Pawnbroker in the 60s. Plus like, I don't know, gross Bruno Matei porno and Salon Kitty or whatever. I think you're giving too much credit to how much the general public not only care to look into this stuff, but would be able to. I think a lot of people forget just how hard it was to find information that wasn't posted in the daily papers. The information's presence in an academic journal means nothing to the average person. Hell, it still means nothing today when most journals are readily accessible, if behind a paywall, to those who want them. And even the Nuremberg trials weren't broadcast or watched widely. There was footage shown, sure. But it wasn't like how people may have watched the OJ Simpson trial. And with all the evidence footage used, unless that was shown on TV (it wasn't at the time) you probably had no way to see it as an average citizen. So I can totally believe that public understanding of the Holocaust was minimal at best until a semi-modern television series brought it to life for them. EDIT: To not just throw poo poo out without any sources I looked up when the topic of "The Holocaust" entered textbooks. I found a section from a class at UC Santa Barbra (Link). Seems that 1952 was the first inclusion of the topic of the plight of the Jewish people in Germany in WW2, but it only kinda touches on the Holocaust, like barely: quote:The only mention of concentration camps is in reference to pastors being sent there: "During the summer, large numbers of Protestant Pastors were arrested and sent to concentration camps."[7] As the protest increased from Catholic and Protestant sects, the situation for the Jews became worse: After that it slowly started to expand. It really wasn't till the mid to late 60s that the Holocaust started to be explicitly talked about, even the details of the camps and the campaign behind them were treated very lightly and kind of had their reality blurred a bit in the name of "good taste". But, the thing here is that these are College textbooks. In the 50s and 60s the college going public was still very small compared to today, and unless you were majoring in History these topics comprised maybe 1 week of info in one semester in your 4 years of college. The reason I make the distinction of college textbooks vs just text books is because I don't think we can really expect the general public to be aware of this stuff, to the level we are, until grade school texts are teaching kids about it. At that point, yes, most people will be exposed to the idea. Crain fucked around with this message at 17:37 on Jun 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:
This became extra funny when the "somehow less ambiguously evil than the Empire" First Order started getting defenders who were upset that their favorite guys were getting treated..like villains...
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
Midig posted:I heard Kathy Griffin is getting poo poo from conservatives for holding up a fake Trump head. Yeah, which would have been the whole point of a stunt like that. I really don't get what she was trying to do with that. If you're going to do provocative art, then the reaction is literally what you're aiming to get. Ideally you're going to use that to funnel attention to something else or just use the attention to some personal end. But no, she threw a punch, then as soon as the obvious reaction happened folded up and tried to run away from the consequences. Snoop Dog did something similar a few months ago as well, and his response was pretty much just a big ol' gently caress You and gently caress Him. Nothing happened.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I thought the standard response was "They'll be private" and then just... not think about it anymore, about what it actually loving means for a road to be private. What happens when private road A needs to connect to separately-owned-and-managed private road B? As an actual answer to this I could imagine a fast pass system. RFID gates just detect if you're going from one coverage area to the next, deducts funds as needed. Problem is: Right now toll roads are still controlled by governments and the fast pass system works because it's also managed by a conglomerate of states that mandate it use the same tech so that there's no issue using it on a toll road in, say, PA or SC or MD. Without that you'd just have another problem: Private Road A uses FreedomPASS LLC but Road B uses NoTreadPASS INC and they aren't compatible. So the driver either has to maintain a system of ever increasing tags or the Private roads will have to settle on a single system, which won't happen because that never happens when you have competing standards (see that XKCD comic). So TL;DR: The one thing that might make it work just adds another problem to the mix.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
business hammocks posted:Lots of women date pieces of poo poo because they are attracted to them and find them charming This reads a little close to reeeeeeeeeing about Chads.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
I still can't quite grasp that a dude getting dumped by a small time game dev spiraled so far out of control.
Crain fucked around with this message at 13:58 on Jun 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 08:07 |
|
|
bessantj posted:It's amazing isn't it. Do you remember when Rebecca Watson made a short comment about how she didn't like men trying to pick her up in elevators and it turned into her getting rape and death threats and Dawkins saying she was the reason female genital mutilation still happens? What a glorious time of pure rationality we live in. That and how prescient this joke diagram was: 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 14:03
|
|