Slashdot Mirror
VR Devs Pull Support For Oculus Rift Until Palmer Luckey Steps Down (vice.com)
After it was revealed that Oculus founder Palmer Luckey backed a pro-Trump political organization called Nimble America that is dedicated to "shitposting" and spreading inflammatory memes about Hillary Clinton, several developers of the Oculus Rift virtual-reality headset have announced that they will stop supporting the headset until its founder steps down. One of the biggest developers for Oculus Rift, Insomniac Games, told Motherboard, "Insomniac Games condemns all forms of hate speech. While everyone has a right to express his or her political opinion, the behavior and sentiments reported do not reflect the values of our company. We are also confident that his behavior and sentiment does not reflect the values of the many Oculus employees we work with on a daily basis." Fez and Superhypercube developer Polytron also said in a statement, "In a political climate as fragile and horrifying as this one, we cannot tacitly endorse these actions by supporting Luckey or his platform." Motherboard reports: Motherboard has reached out to several other, more well-known VR developers who work with Oculus including Fantastic Contraption makers Northway Games and Job Simulator makers Owlchemy Labs. Northway Games couldn't be reached immediately for comment but tweeted the following: "What. The. Fuck. [accompanied with a link to the news via Kotaku]" and "Definitely using every fibre of my 'professionalism' to not tweet some tweets right now." Owlchemy Labs, which is currently developing for Job Simulator for the Oculus Touch controls, declined to comment either way. E McNeill, who has developed a couple of games for Oculus Rift and GearVR, suggested that like-minded VR developers raise money for Hillary Clinton's campaign to counter the money Luckey has raised for Trump. [E McNeill tweeted: "Idle Q: Would any Oculus devs join me in a donation drive for HIllary? We could aim to beat Nimble America's $11k. I'd start with $1k myself."] "This backlash is nonsense," said James Green, co-founder of VR developer Carbon Games. "I absolutely support him doing whatever he wants politically if it's legal. To take any other position is against American values."
So basically these developers are intolerant of any type of political message other than their own.
This isn't what you get with the Citizens United decision. This is what you get when money can buy hate.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
As long as you think EXACTLY the way they do.
Of course if he was "shitposting" Trump, that would be A-OK, right?
Considering how much corporate money is flowing into Hillary's campaign... She's obviously not going to change that.
Hillary... on paper, she's everything Democrats claim to hate.
And for a party that claims to fight hate... There sure is a lot of violence, racisim and hate coming from the party that says they want to bring us together.
Of course... they mean "we want to unite... as long as you vote Democrat and agree with everything we say". It's all about freedom of speech and freedom of expression until you say "Hillary is a POS".
Can they not even see what parodies of themselves they've become?
TV tells them someone is hitler and they all try to out-tantrum one another.
It's not even about supporting Trump anymore, it's about being ashamed to stand with or anywhere near these people. They don't have any liberal values. They run on feigned indignation and trying to publicly shame others.
It's pathetic. Pull yourselves together, you numbnuts.
What is astonishing to me is the level of rhetoric and the stretch of logic that has come into place since our Alien vs. Predator presidential race (i.e. whoever wins, we lose). Now we have a situation just like the Mozilla debacle with Brendan Eich except that it is much much flimsier an argument this time around.
But here's the thing, Insomniac and Polytron management: your job is to make money for the investors of your company, not to use them as some political tool because you disagree with the politics of one of the employees of Oculus. Period.
These decisions will only harm these companies financially because of diminished interest from people who own an Oculus. Unless the management has concrete data that their continued support of the Oculus will harm their sales due to the political connection (and I'll bet diamonds to dollars that they don't), then the boards of directors of all of these companies should direct the executive management of the companies that withdrew support for Oculus to reverse their decision or be terminated for breach of fiduciary duty.
Enough of this SJW bullshit, especially when investor money and returns are at stake and the backlash from these actions could be worse. E McNeill is totally correct - if you want to fight a Trump supporter, put your own money up rather than trying to suppress others as if you were some Soviet-era state enterprise licking the boots of the party you support.
Disagree with Hillary being what Democrats hate?
Rich? White? Elite? Above the law? Votes for every war put before her? Is a LARGE part of what's responsible for the Middle East being the cluster fuck it is? Racist comments like "I'm late? I must be on CP time." because, you know, colored people are to lazy to be on time? Super Predators?
What about Hillary doesn't scream "This is what Democrats hate"?
Not the best choice? Neither candidate is trustworthy, but Trump hasn't gotten a good portion of the world mired in failed countries at war. When it comes to war, Hillary is probably to the right of any previous president, including W.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
"This backlash is nonsense," said James Green, co-founder of VR developer Carbon Games. "I absolutely support him doing whatever he wants politically if it's legal. To take any other position is against American values."
I have little to no interest in VR, and negative interest in Oculus. But I now know of Carbon Games and have a respectful view of them.
Conversely, I also now know of Polytron and have a negative opinion of them. Insomniac was also a 2nd rate developer and now I have further reason to ignore them.
Like George Soros?
"Shitposting" is fraud rather than speech for a few reasons.
It is knowingly false. For example, "shitposters" distribute a purported photo of Hillary Clinton in blackface with Bill, which doesn't match her eye color or her and Bill's appearance at the time. But they keep distributing it.
They then spoof the comment system by having robots upmod posts and downmod their detractors, thus fraudulently promoting their comments as highly regarded.
They mis-state the first amendment of the constitution by telling people that reactions to their abuse are hypocritical and against the first amendment, when the first amendment does not protect anyone from the consequences of their speech, nor does it promise anyone the podium of their choice.
Taking action to show your disapproval of such action is laudable.
Bruce Perens.
It's Trump's emphasis on "defeat them quickly" that led me to the same conclusion. I don't think a few nuclear bombs will do that much damage, though they would still be war crimes. The real risk is that Trump bungles his "limited" nuclear attack and somehow sucks Pakistan or Israel into the mess... Given the Donald's record of bungling everything he touches, I wouldn't bet on a good outcome. There are some Trump supporters who would gladly welcome a permanent state of war with 1.6 billion Muslims.
On the Hillary thing, I don't even like her, but I don't see how to get to "dystopia" if she wins. Seems most likely that she'll pretty much stay the course, and we certainly haven't gotten to dystopia yet. I'd prefer her to change the course in a more positive direction, but I don't expect her to do it unless we give her a progressive Congress and they put the pressure on her. There used to be a time when that could have included some progressive Republicans, but they've been exterminated from today's so-called Republican Party.
On my Subject: question, I really have no idea. Too many years since I got one.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
You mean like when the left hires people to protest at Trump's conventions? Or leftists like Soros pay people to start riots, even bussing them into other cities to do so? Yeah, lefties never complain about acts of violence and destruction when it's their own people doing it, but if the right ever counters, even with something as minor as "shitposting", they start screaming and crying, demanding that there be punishments for people who disagree with them.
The left are full of childish, pathetic, losers. A shining example of a coddled generation who had everything handed to them, were never allowed to fail or learn from their mistakes, and as a result wound up unprepared and unable to handle the real world, throwing tantrums whenever things don't go their way.
Grow up, you bunch of babies.
"This backlash is nonsense," said James Green, co-founder of VR developer Carbon Games. "I absolutely support him doing whatever he wants politically if it's legal. To take any other position is against American values."
I think you meant to say you absolutely support other people doing what they want politically if it's legal, such as disagreeing with Luckey, or boycotting his product, or raising money for Clinton in response. Because taking any other position would be against American values _and_ hypocritical, right?
And yes, he's perfectly within his rights to say what he said, and i'm within my rights to point out the contradiction, and other people are within their rights to respond to me with disagreements, and etc. Saying that one person gets to have their say and everyone else needs to shut up about it after that is not how political discourse works.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
It's OK to refuse to tolerate intolerance. Indeed, it's something you need to do.
Bruce Perens.
So what I've learned is that when the girlfriend of someone they don't like gets threatened on Twitter, SJWs are perfectly okay with it, because who cares about progressive principles when we're busy abusing people for supporting the wrong political party? Or are you going to claim she did something wrong merely by being his GF?
No, I'm telling you they're hypocrites. If you don't like what somebody is saying and want to use your entire company's financial weight to silence them, good for you, but that is the opposite of supporting somebody's ability to espouse their opinions.
Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
Wars are won two ways: 1) Attrition 2) Loss of public support. We have failed to win conflicts since WWII mostly due to the peace movement. When your enemy has more resolve than you and knows that your populace will not support war, they win. They just need to push back long enough for the other side to grow weary and give up. Between being over sensitive on collateral damage and a large anti-war movement, we are paralyzed militarily. The world knows that and it emboldens them. In the end, our peace loving protesters could very likely cause more death and destruction than they save. War should be a last resort, but the resolve to engage it, is a great deterrence. We lack that.
Well, I think you're confused about a few things. First of all, there is really only one kind of business where one can make a legal claim that its first priority must always be to produce income, and that is a public stock company - and even in that case there are limits to that claim regarding lawfulness, ethics, and the future effects of short-term income strategies.
A private company can and should place a number of things above income, like moral and ethical behavior. In addition, my state has the B corporation which actually has to be certified by a non-profit to meet rigorous standards of social and environmental performance, accountability, and transparency. So, my private company is not one of these potentially unethical public stock companies. Modern public stock corporations don't have to be that anymore and IMO should not be one.
Second, you don't have much understanding of libel law in the U.S., not your fault but because most people don't follow the courts that closely. For the most part libel suits don't work here. That's part of the problem. Much better to bring such cases in England.
Third, you are accusing me of not supporting someone's free speech and you are calling me a hypocrite for not doing so. So, let's start with the text of the first amendment:
So, while Congress must not make laws suppressing speech, it says absolutely nothing about my conduct as a private individual or business owner. Free Speech means speech which is not repressed by the government, not that I as a private individual must countenance, permit on my property or support such speech for it to be free.
This is another common thing - many people try to (in the words of Alan Henry) use free speech as a weapon when it doesn't apply or as a shield to hide behind when they are criticized.
I choose not to support lies and cheating and I feel really good about it.
Bruce Perens.
This is free speech working the way it should work.
I refer you to the XKCD panels about the First Amendment.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/fr...
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert