LGBTQ behind a content warning? That’s like putting black people behind a content warning.
Don’t give them any ideas
Hell yeah it’s sensitive I start swooning and feel hot inside whenever I see cute boys. Thanks you twitch for helping me combat my femboy addiction.
Is there anywhere left on the internet that’s uncensored? I miss the golden age.
Yep, but most of them get filled with people who can’t shut the fuck up about politics or conspiracy theories.
And blatant hatred.
And pedophiles
and gore
Well, Rumble, Kick, and 4chan still exist. They are much more hands off for moderation. But I wouldn’t recommend them as nice places to explore. Moderation has its benefits too.
Compared to Twitch, Youtube is less involved in censoring based on message but much more reactive for DMCA stuff and demonetization.
And other people have pointed out that Lemmy and the fediverse in general have moderation that is entirely dependent on your instance.
here*
<answer>
*may be up to your instance’s admins
Currently the top of the suggestions forum. By a lot.
As someone who has watched less than an hour of anything on twitch, I guess I’m going to change my avoidance of the site from passive to active.
Yeah, I’m switching my Twitch viewing from Twitch.com w/ my ad-blocker active, to the Grayjay app, which also blocks ads. And I don’t even watch ads, only VODs from one streamer, and only a couple times/month.
I was going to do that anyway, but I’ll do it with a bit more feeling. And for pride month, I’ll completely avoid the site.
And for my part, I will continue to have never used it.
And one fine morning, the other sites you visit regularly will apply a policy that has become the norm elsewhere.
Big rainbow capitalism in June, but worried about “Brands align their ads with content that reflects their brand values.” dollars the rest of the year.
Sorry my existence does not align with brand values. That must be really rough for you Twitch.
I guess we have reached a social austerity phase of oligarchy.
The two genders, white cishet male and political.
I explained the concept of there being the two genders of “cis-male” and “political” to one of my professors at a religious university and he was actually interested to hear me out on it because he had never thought of it in that paradigm. I’m absolutely not saying that everyone can be convinced, but some people can be nudged in the right direction if you have a good rapport with them.
Most of the time, people change their minds when they see the source as coming from their in-group. If your professor respected you, they’re more likely to listen to you. If they see you as some damn hippy out-group, it doesn’t matter how many facts or studies or testimonies you have.
It’s kind of a fundamental problem with humanity.
I have gotten pretty good at weaseling my way into in-groups despite being a queer socialist with strong opinions about human rights, unions, and civil rights. It took a lot of trial and error though.
Interesting take, considering the extreme power women have. Women make up the majority of household spending, women in younger generations are making more money than men, and women are now less vulnerable to job loss.
If you’re wondering where the sudden rightward drift is coming from, it’s younger men feeling hopeless and powerless to change it, for the above reasons and much more. The idea that the split is exclusively cishet male/political is wild and borderline irresponsible. While true in some states and circles, it’s wealthy white women/political in others, and cishet men don’t get included at all.
I understand how you feel, and you’re not totally wrong - society is changing and shifting power away from men towards historically marginalised groups.
The hopelessness and pain that men is feeling is coming from capitalism, though. It’s corporations stealing your future.
The thing is that men held almost all of the power historically, and a small shift away from men doesn’t mean that women have extreme power now. Don’t let yourself be scammed by the rich and wealthy into fighting their battles for them.
You need to recognise your true enemy.
That is an amazing answer, I wish I could sticky it to the top.
deleted by creator
I looked at the rules and it says:
Labeling not required:
Streams containing informational or educational content that aim to share knowledge in a neutral, fact-based manner, rather than engaging in any kind of advocacy for an issue or candidate. For example, sharing the history of how votes in the US presidential election are counted to determine the next President, or merely encouraging individuals to vote or register to vote.
So saying for example Trump is a homophobic fascist should be allowed
As the op points put, it’s going to be used as a reporting harassment. If it requires human intervention to decide, they might have bots or automatic actions based on number of reports.
Just because it’s true doesn’t mean it’s not advocacy.
Propagandizing and “sharing knowledge in a neutral, fact-based manner” aren’t mutually exclusive. The atomic unit of propaganda isn’t lies, it’s emphasis.
Propaganda and sharing knowledge in a neutral, fact-based manner are absolutely mutually exclusive.
Propaganda is biased by definition.
I’m a giant media conglomerate.
I have two facts that I intend to share in a neutral manner (and, for the case of this hypothetical, we will assume that “sharing knowledge in a 100% completely neutral, fact-based manner” is even possible).
I will call these Fact A and Fact B.
During the Super Bowl, I denote 30 seconds of airtime to Fact A, and denote only 5 seconds of airtime to Fact B.
Question: is this propaganda?
True neutrality, yes. But the average person sees neutrality as the appearance of neutrality, which is what propaganda revels in. It’s why any both sides arguments are inherently propaganda on many topics, because just the very act of attempting to appear like there are two valid sides is in and of itself propaganda.
Climate change is a perfect example of this. Anthropogenic climate change is happening and even the oil companies are having to admit it publicly (after knowing about it for at least 60 years, but we’ve known this was an issue since 1890), but there are still tons of places who bring on denialists after yet another year of 'record breaking, once in a lifetime’s storms.
There is no unbiased “neutral”, why particular facts are important and how they should be presented is determined by your biases.
To your point: “trump is a human” is a controversial statement.
Absolutely. Humanizing politicians is biased towards the status quo by distracting from the effects of their policies, which is literally the only relevance they have to our lives.
There’s an implicit liberal, idealist bias in examining personal aspects of politicians instead of political economy and what factions in power selected that politician.
you’re telling me the website currently going through antisemitism allegations is not a very good website?
What an odd thing to happen.
TBF, that’s not a very good litmus test since anyone protesting the Palestinian genocide has been accused of the same, which we all know is utter bullshit.
Didn’t you know, criticism of the Israeli government is tantamount to advocating for a genocide of Jewish people. It’s binary, no way anyone can have an opinion that exists between a spectrum of the two. I mean someone criticizing a government and not it’s people is just absurd.
(/S, incase anyone doubts my sarcasm)
Tribalism is fucking exhausting.
Fair, but it looks bad when they seem to be promoting a side and silencing another as a platform. They disabled email signups for accounts from Israel for over a year. Yes, this also affected Palestinians, but it was in reaction to Oct. 7, an event that Israeli users would certainly want to bring attention to for fostering sympathy. The stated reason was to prevent graphic material from being posted, but this hadn’t been implemented for Ukraine or other wartorn areas.
They also endorse streamers that are very overtly pro-palestine. Some of them did an “Arab” to “Loves Sabra” tier list of other people on stage at Twitchcon. Twitch later deleted the vod/clips of it.
Yeah, that’s why the Fediverse is preferable to centralised social media. Use PeerTube for streaming, not YouTube or Twitch.
Is there a Fediverse option for livestreams?
Owncast https://owncast.online/
Thank you!
There’s also PeerTube which supports live streams and even supports distributing a sizable portion of the load via P2P. Clients can seed your stream and distribute it themselves, lightening the load on your server. I’ve used it a few times, it’s very neat and it works well. Only con is the latency (it’s around 2 minutes like old school twitch)
I don’t really use peertube, but if it has livestreams I’ll check it out, thanks!
Use PeerTube for streaming, not YouTube or Twitch.
Even though the vast majority of streamers do stream for 0 viewers, the idea is that they will get a viewer eventually.
Jeff Bezos must really think (and want) Trump is going to get his dictator for life wish. Preemptively caving to the right this often and visibly.
Let me be the first to say that it is amazing that Twitch is even still alive and honestly if they got kicked off of Amazon Web Services, they’d be done for.
Their moderation is historically the worst of almost any platform I’ve ever seen. It seems like every six months or so I hear about something heinous that their moderation teams have done.
Off the top of my head I remember the hot tub controversy, the female nipple thing, the tasteful or artistic nudity thing, the extremely inconsistent ban times for large vs small creators, the awful VOD mute controversies, the VOD deleting, forced ads being mishandled, covering for Dr Disrespect, and general sexism that isn’t even consistent.
Twitch is a dumpster fire on their mod team. All the dang time. One week someone will accidentally show porn on stream and get a 3 day ban, the next week my favorite streamer will show a glimpse of a bare ass from a mod in a game for 0.5 seconds and receive the same 3 day ban. That actually happened. How is it that you have soft core porn on your website and yet you’re banning people for showing too much cheek for a handful of frames?
The same is true of every free video streaming service. They are not viable stand-alone businesses. They can only ever operate at a loss. Therefore their main use is as a propagandists tool, to control and shape narratives.
It depends what you mean. If you’re saying any live streaming service like Twitch, yes I agree. If you’re just saying video streaming services in general I’d disagree.
I mean any free video streaming platform, including YouTube.
I don’t think that’s true. If YouTube were ever freed up, it would likely survive. YouTube actually generates a significant profit for its parent company so even if it did have to pay for resources, it would be okay. TikTok would also survive if sold in the US and held independently. As would most of the major social medias which are essentially stand alone companies.
That’s also borne out by companies like Nebula existing as well as Patreon. The problem with serving videos is live video specifically which takes a lot more infrastructure than normal VOD. That at the moment is not profitable for anyone as far as I know.
There’s plenty of speculation that YouTube has never turned a profit. We have no way to know for sure, though.
TikTok is quite different since it’s shorts only. I can totally see that being a viable model, because you can more comfortably cram ads between pieces of content. That’s why YouTube is pushing shorts so heavily.
Nebula is propped up by private investment. I had a quick look and found SEC filings which indicate they have raised over $9 million dollars in private investment in the past 3 years.
Patreon has almost no video hosting compared to how much revenue they have.
TikTok is quite different since it’s shorts only
Tiktok allows streaming too. It’s got great discoverability, but garbage monetization.
if they got kicked off of Amazon Web Services, they’d be done for.
You know that Amazon bought Twitch many years ago, right? And they still own it.
I do know that, Amazon could kick them off at any time. Just because Amazon owns the service does not mean that they view it as valuable to use their AWS resources on it. Normally it makes sense to lower costs to do so but if the service isn’t seen as valuable or missteps their admin actions, they could easily end up on the side of the road.
They also exist in this weird space currently where their existence is justified by getting Prime subscriptions up (Prime members get perks on the platform). Now I don’t have their numbers but streaming is ungodly expensive even for Amazon. So I doubt twitch is rolling in a huge pile of cash for them and I doubt they have the Prime numbers to back it up.
Leading to my conclusion that Amazon could say “sink or swim” and kick them off AWS or just sell the company outright since another company would just use AWS anyway and they might make more money that route in fees.
It is true that twitch loses Amazon money, this has been known for years. Yet they are still supported by Amazon. There must be something beyond money that the trillion dollar corporation sees in having absolute control over a major media platform. You focus and argue about checkers while Amazon ignores your cries and continues playing chess.
Seems I’m being misinterpreted badly. I’m saying that Amazon has no monetary interest in Twitch. So yes they’re dependent on an Amazon vision to be able to have that internal access to AWS.
The problem with that is if somehow that vision doesn’t pan out or Twitch steps in the way of it. That was my reason for remarking they’re lucky to be alive. They’re lucky Amazon thinks they have value because the moment they don’t think it, they’re dead without internal AWS support.
Twitch provides value to Amazon by operating at a loss and paying for AWS on the back end, Twitch might appear less profitable (or even operate at a loss), AWS still records revenue from the transactions. You’re looking at the surface, where Twitch needs to be individually profitable. Companies use shells like this in far deeper ways for their own tax benefits.
This allows Amazon to shift their tax burden to a company that’s operating “at a loss”, and keep the revenue with AWS and show record profits.
Companies wouldn’t just buy others up, intending that all they do is cause harm. Twitch is being leveraged in deeper ways.
Im not sure why people are disagreeing or downvoting me while also making my point. I said they’re lucky to be alive and I highlighted why. They cannot survive without Amazon or AWS. That was the whole point. Yes they serve some alternate purpose to Amazon surely, but again that’s also a threat.
If for whatever reason they stop serving that purpose (whatever it is) or someone high up stops seeing their value, they’re done for as a business altogether. Because they can’t justify themselves internally much at all and their financials are probably awful. That was my point. And if Amazon decides they’re done with them for whatever reason, they cannot survive without AWS being so cheap for them. Not sure how that point got lost in the sauce.
I’m saying that Amazon has no monetary interest in Twitch.
Taxes are monetary losses. Twitch is providing monetary benefit to Amazon. That is their ‘success’. That IS their survival.
AWS is only cheap for them artificially. You keep replying as if Twitch needs to make a profit to be ‘successful’. It doesn’t. It doesn’t need AWS to be artificially cheap either. You’re missing the forest for the trees.
The online retail store Amazon actually loses money too, the main generator of profit for Amazon is actually AWS. Every other branch of the business is about market control.
Ugh. Can someone make another video game streaming service that doesn’t allow influencers? I don’t even care if it was popular. I just want twitch of old back.
Edit: Sorry guys. I’m looking for something that is impossible to have. There will never again be an emerging esports scene. Unless it completely dies, I guess.
What do you actually have in mind? Are you using the word “influencer” in some narrow way? Every streamer influences their viewers so my reading of your comment is that you are asking for a streaming service that doesn’t allow streaming. Obviously you don’t mean that, so I’m curious what do you mean.
Influencer, to me, is a very specific type of streamer. Oh, young whippersnapper, early on twitch was more focused on esports. That’s not to say there wasn’t variety streamers that had a following based mostly on their personality’s. That was growing along side esports except youtube was had dominated that content with lets plays and pewdiepie. For a long time LoL tournaments were the number one draw. There were others, too, and you could find and join those communities pretty easily.
Please, don’t go off on how those things still exist. I’m not blind. It’s just it’s the whole platform is not geared toward that kind of content anymore.
Peertube is a federated option, and while it’s primarily meant as a decentralized replacement for YouTube, many instances include the ability to stream live. https://video.infosec.exchange is the instance I use, but you might benefit from using a larger instance or one that shares an administrative staff with any other ActivityPub-connected things you use (e.g. lemmy.world).
One lgbtq+ streamer I know dual streams to owncast
The directory is a list of live owncast streams.
Also, you should be able to chat on owncast streams with fediverse accounts, but the last time I tried, I wasn’t able to log log in with my lemmy account.
What about moderation or controls over the directory? I don’t want to host a stream and be published next to nazis. Is anyone keeping them out? I do see a sort of lip-service “no tolerance” statement with no details about what fits that criteria and no claims of active moderation; without those two things it’s toothless and the whole place is at risk of nazi bar syndrome.
Demanding moderation means demanding an authority makes decisions. Who is that authority? American (neo)liberals? French nationalists? Saudi government? Maybe the owners are beholden to outside authorities like banks and advertisers?
Twitch, X, and Reddit becoming shitholes is an inevitable feature of capitalism and cancel culture. This thought process you have will always result in the oppression of minorities and minority opinions, and a push to the lowest common denominator; in other words, the least offensive, milquetoast, worthless experience people will suffer through but still come back to.
I didn’t say I wanted capitalism and American neoliberals, I said I wanted moderation or I won’t put my identity and work and face next to people who want me dead. The app you’re on, the community you’re posting this comment in have moderation. Do you think the mods who receive reports about this thread are the Saudi government?
Cancel culture isn’t real, grow up. The people who made the term up want you to demand that all conversations be treated equally, that all viewpoints should be able to shout down all other viewpoints until the internet is full of trash and we’re all completely isolated. That’s how fascism works: piss and shit into the discourse until nobody wants it any more. That is why X is becoming trash: because the person who owns it made it his first priority to start shitting into every progressive conversation until none of them wanted to be there any more. Taking away the ability to block and deplatform people SUPPRESSES minority voices, because that environment only rewards whoever shouts the loudest, and if you have a majority on the platform, you are shouting the loudest.
Everywhere is “beholden” to some person or organization that made the place and controls it. The stream directory of this app is already beholden to the people who put it up; their lip-service code of conduct suggests they don’t want to platform nazis. The only thing I’m complaining about is that they aren’t taking any concrete steps to ensure they’re kept out.
I agree there should be moderation, but I don’t think there should be a moderator. You should, like Lemmy, be able to join an instance and that instance be able to moderate (or start your own instance). Anything else creates one voice that decides what’s acceptable, and gives you no option except to leave when that doesn’t match your views. You may agree with them at first, but it’s only a matter of time until you don’t.
I don’t know how this service works, but I would hope (and assume) each instance gets to choose if they federated with other instances.
I’m ambivalent about this in some ways but what you’re suggesting is compatible with what I would ask from them. If they’re going to have a central directory, moderate that directory: that’s one instance. Let others put up their own directories and moderate those; those are just additional instances. If the tech can be deployed to multiple instances, then it’s federated by default.
Yeah, this is basically what I was getting at. Like your Lemmy homepage, it should be managed by your instance, not a central power. Even if they’re perfect for you at first, it creates a thing that can be taken over or purchased without an alternative. Having a federated option makes it so you can find an instance you like or just spin up your own.
The downside of free speech is having to endure the opinion of idiots, be it nazis or religous asshats or whatever bullshit people come up with. It’s not that you solve a problem by shutting it up either. It just eludes your direct attention.
But it still is a very important thing that always slowly dies in favour of the majority’s political flavour-of-the-month. Noone cares as long as they’re part of the majority up until they suddenly aren’t. Then the flaws of censorship emerge.
Eyyy fellow Kiri enjoyer 🥰
Kick and Rumble?
There’s some shitty people there. But if you try to babyproof an online service it will eventually fail and people start writing exactly what you wrote.
While I disagree with the bullet point, this is meant for streams that are exclusively that content, the actual guideline is this:
Can anyone verify that UserVoice is trustworthy?
Define trustworthy? It is a twitch affiliated website but you have to trust twitch to begin with.
As far as I can tell, UserVoice is a third party used for data collection. To sign the petition you have to agree to terms of a company “not owned by Twitch”.
I just want to make sure I’m not just giving my information to a third party to sell in the name of hoping to sway this issue. Especially if Twitch isn’t seriously considering the petition.
