The title kinda buries the lede there. I thought it was ridiculous to fine a platform just because a streamer happened to die on camera, but no, they were streaming months long abuse and torture of this guy at the hands of his co-streamers.
It’s all over the place on Facebook and Twitter though. There’s dog fighting, cock fighting, monkey abuse showing up on my Facebook home feed every now and then. This shouldn’t be a surprise really.
Facebook goes wild if you don’t really interact with it other than to browse.
Pause for a microsecond over something, welp I guess that’s your hobby now. For some reason mine always shows me chess. I have never played chess. Hate it. A family member on my Facebook friends list likes chess. FB just goes “chess? how about chess?” like it’s got nothing else to really offer other than flag waving racism.
I’d love to know why an algorithm shows me this stuff as I don’t look any of it up. It’s quite traumatic to see. It’s the reason I don’t use these social media apps anymore. They’re all suggested posts and it’s an assault.
Generally it shows us content that makes us mad. Sadly, and opposite to what we thibk, humans are more likely to engage with content thst pisses us off. Maybe it took things too far with yours. Possibly you commented on how fucked up one post was so it showed you more. Dunno.
FB is known for doing this, plus thier obvious propaganda, they want engagement so any drama they can randomly push will increase that. YOutube is a close second. thats why right wing drama is very good for business in general.
Algorithm shows a preview of a chaotic scene where the content isn’t easily identified.
You open / interact / linger on it to figure out what is happening before identifying it as something you don’t want to look at.
Algorithm detects increased interaction and happily serves up more.
I play a little game with Instagram sometimes. I click on one (1) thirst trap bikini girl post in the search reel. Then I see how many times I have to press the little 3 dot menu and pick “not interested” on allllll the other thirst trap bikini girl posts that immediately appear.
I generally have to press “not interested” about 15 times before my feed reverts to only having bikini girl thirst traps once every 20 or so posts.
I used to get sucked in by cop videos on TikTok. I think it’s the curiosity. I hated it. I’d get shown so many. I didn’t enjoy watching them. I thought a lot about what’s happening and I really think it’s just the initial hook of “what’s happening here???” because there’s a cop. I had to actively scroll away as fast as possible every time I saw them to get that shit away. I finally did, but it was rough. It’s easy to fall into traps like that with social media algorithms. They aren’t meant to maximize your enjoyment, they’re meant to maximize your retention, engagement, and spending.
im glad i dont have an app of tiktok, i just randomly click on pet/animal videos that link to someones account(mostly from DODO videos), but i close it after a few seconds because im not interested.
Seriously, all these comments about fucked-up and predatory content…has anyone considered quitting Facebook? Or just algorithmically-served content altogether? Am I crazy for preferring to build and do my best to expand my own silo rather than having billionaire-owned corporations do it for me?
They kinda did. The dudes were taken in as part of an ongoing investigation but were then released. I can see why it’s fared for the cops when even the victims are saying it’s by their own choice. But it’s no excuse for kick.
The investigation, opened in December, is looking into “deliberate violence against vulnerable persons” and “spreading recordings of images related to offences involving deliberate violations of physical integrity,” Martinelli’s statement said. It did not specify why Pormanove could be considered vulnerable.
The statement said two co-streamers allegedly involved in the case were briefly taken into custody in January but were released pending further investigation.
In parallel, the Nice prosecutor said, investigators interviewed Pormanove and one of his co-streamers who both appeared to be victims of violence and humiliation. They “strongly denied being victims of violence, stating that the events were staged in order to `generate a buzz’ and make money.”
execution of the law is always more complicated than we want it to be. They could have been let off as the investigation continued if the victim told the cops “i did everything with full consent and it was all an act for the entertainment of the stream.”. Cops/W/e the french version of DA is would possibly need to continue the investigation to show that either he was unable to consent to the actions or it was a lie that there was consent.
I’m just a layperson and maybe it was more cut and dry and the cops really dropped the ball. It just doesn’t seem so cut and dry legally to me. Will be interesting to see the outcome of the investigation from this.
You know how NDAs are generally not enforceable in a court of law, no matter if the person “consented” or not, because some things are just not legal, and chances are theyre not knowledgeable enough to make that decision anyway? Kind of like how Statutory Rape works? Yeah. That, but with actual fucking torture thats broadcast publicly.
I like that. That’s a good strawman. You compared a Kick stream focused on and containing only torture that literally killed a person to an artistic form of expression, a movie that was screened at Cannes and won many awards and is ranked second on the list of the Sundance Film Festival’s Top 10 films of All Time.
Obviously, I don’t think you’re a big enough idiot to have meant that seriously, it was clearly satirical.
the dude died on stream , and then the people who tortured him to death sat around after he died, still streaming his dead body , and talked about what to tell the police, before they called emergency services. and here you guys are, arguing in their favor, calling it censorship that Kick is getting fined, and debating on whether the torture is “simulated”.
That’s a good summary of my point, though I’m not sure why you think it’s a “strawman” and it certainly wasn’t satirical.
A strawman fallacy involves misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to attack. I, however, accurately represented your argument and then used an **analogy ** to highlight its flaws. An analogy is a rhetorical tool used to explain a concept by comparing it to something similar. In this case, I was responding directly to your question about why it matters if torture is simulated, and if it’s ok to be streamed.
My point, which you seem to have somehow missed, is that we have a clear precedent for broadcasting simulated torture. And, as you so helpfully pointed out, simulated torture not only is ok to be streamed, but it can also receive acclaim and awards.
I’m glad we agree that simulated torture can be broadcast.
you’re point was fucking stupid. you compared a torture-only steam that psychopaths watched to satisfy their perverse need to see humans suffer, which actually fucking killed someone, to an award-winning movie where nobody was hurt and the torture was not the point.
what else do you feel is no different than Reservoir Dogs? beheading videos from Afghanistan? rape videos? animal torture? CSAM? or are those only OK if they are “simulated”?
either way, you seem like a pretty disgusting person.
lol, so now I can go into pointing out your logical fallacies… but, honestly I’ve already spent more than enough time on this conversation with someone who is clearly very toxic. Thanks for the quick response and for validating my initial impression that you’re someone whose opinion I can happily live without, and welcome to my blocked list.
“Salut maman, Comment tu vas ? Coincé pour un moment avec son jeu de mort, avait-il déclaré. Ça va trop loin. J’ai l’impression d’être séquestré avec leur concept de merde. J’en ai marre, je veux me barrer, l’autre il veut pas, il me séquestre”. (“Hey Mom, how are you? Stuck for a while with his death game,” he said. “This is going too far. I feel like I’m being held captive with their shitty concept. I’m fed up, I want to get out, the other guy doesn’t want me, he’s holding me captive.”)
By how it reads, it kind of looks like more of a Jack-ass situation if voluntary abuse. There was some mention of him getting shot with paint balls. Also, the autopsy report said he had no trauma.
Well sure, it could have been something he drank, or maybe he wanted to kill himself and took something on purpose. We’ll probably end up finding out more at some point.
“Sure you can leave, but this will end the stream marathon, the three of us will lose money over it, and our community will be quite upset with you. But yeah, you can leave. Alright.”
A person with a intellectual disability will often be easier for abusers to manipulate and may not value their own well-being over the abusers approval
I mean, i get that the platform has obviously shitty security features, but more outrage should be directed towards the two asswipe streamers that actually tortured the guy.
He actively wanted out as seen by the desperate text sent to his mother saying how he “felt like a hostage” that was read aloud by one of his abusers on stream, but due to coersion both financially and socially. In one of the streams his abusers openly brag about how if he doesnt participate in their “game” they’ll take the keys for his car and his apartment until he does.
There’s generally a lot of factors that add up to staying in an abusive situation. From his point of view its likely that there didn’t seem much of an option for him outside of this.
He may have been very emotionally broken that he can’t think rationally . Everybody has completly different tolerability levels. The teo guys who tortured him could still have say no too so they are responsible
The title kinda buries the lede there. I thought it was ridiculous to fine a platform just because a streamer happened to die on camera, but no, they were streaming months long abuse and torture of this guy at the hands of his co-streamers.
It is insane how it is even possible to live stream the torture of someone for months without any law enforcement getting involved.
It’s similar to fear factor—you can authorize quite a lot of things in a contract.
The medical examiner has said that they don’t think his death was caused directly by the treatment during the stream.
As long as you give a platform to the right wing, laws never apply to you.
It’s all over the place on Facebook and Twitter though. There’s dog fighting, cock fighting, monkey abuse showing up on my Facebook home feed every now and then. This shouldn’t be a surprise really.
Thats just like, your algorithm man. -Labowskie
Facebook goes wild if you don’t really interact with it other than to browse.
Pause for a microsecond over something, welp I guess that’s your hobby now. For some reason mine always shows me chess. I have never played chess. Hate it. A family member on my Facebook friends list likes chess. FB just goes “chess? how about chess?” like it’s got nothing else to really offer other than flag waving racism.
I’d love to know why an algorithm shows me this stuff as I don’t look any of it up. It’s quite traumatic to see. It’s the reason I don’t use these social media apps anymore. They’re all suggested posts and it’s an assault.
Generally it shows us content that makes us mad. Sadly, and opposite to what we thibk, humans are more likely to engage with content thst pisses us off. Maybe it took things too far with yours. Possibly you commented on how fucked up one post was so it showed you more. Dunno.
FB is known for doing this, plus thier obvious propaganda, they want engagement so any drama they can randomly push will increase that. YOutube is a close second. thats why right wing drama is very good for business in general.
I play a little game with Instagram sometimes. I click on one (1) thirst trap bikini girl post in the search reel. Then I see how many times I have to press the little 3 dot menu and pick “not interested” on allllll the other thirst trap bikini girl posts that immediately appear.
I generally have to press “not interested” about 15 times before my feed reverts to only having bikini girl thirst traps once every 20 or so posts.
I used to get sucked in by cop videos on TikTok. I think it’s the curiosity. I hated it. I’d get shown so many. I didn’t enjoy watching them. I thought a lot about what’s happening and I really think it’s just the initial hook of “what’s happening here???” because there’s a cop. I had to actively scroll away as fast as possible every time I saw them to get that shit away. I finally did, but it was rough. It’s easy to fall into traps like that with social media algorithms. They aren’t meant to maximize your enjoyment, they’re meant to maximize your retention, engagement, and spending.
im glad i dont have an app of tiktok, i just randomly click on pet/animal videos that link to someones account(mostly from DODO videos), but i close it after a few seconds because im not interested.
Seriously, all these comments about fucked-up and predatory content…has anyone considered quitting Facebook? Or just algorithmically-served content altogether? Am I crazy for preferring to build and do my best to expand my own silo rather than having billionaire-owned corporations do it for me?
They kinda did. The dudes were taken in as part of an ongoing investigation but were then released. I can see why it’s fared for the cops when even the victims are saying it’s by their own choice. But it’s no excuse for kick.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/article/outcry-over-french-streamers-death-on-air-as-authorities-probe-allegations-of-abuse/
I mean, the footage is all public, right? Why shouldn’t the cops be able to watch it with their own eyes, and determine if it’s kosher?
execution of the law is always more complicated than we want it to be. They could have been let off as the investigation continued if the victim told the cops “i did everything with full consent and it was all an act for the entertainment of the stream.”. Cops/W/e the french version of DA is would possibly need to continue the investigation to show that either he was unable to consent to the actions or it was a lie that there was consent.
I’m just a layperson and maybe it was more cut and dry and the cops really dropped the ball. It just doesn’t seem so cut and dry legally to me. Will be interesting to see the outcome of the investigation from this.
You know how NDAs are generally not enforceable in a court of law, no matter if the person “consented” or not, because some things are just not legal, and chances are theyre not knowledgeable enough to make that decision anyway? Kind of like how Statutory Rape works? Yeah. That, but with actual fucking torture thats broadcast publicly.
Was it real or simulated? I haven’t seen any article make a definitive statement.
Uh, what’s does that matter? Is it ok to stream shit like that if it’s simulated?
Should we not be able to watch Reservoir Dogs because there’s simulated torture in it?
I like that. That’s a good strawman. You compared a Kick stream focused on and containing only torture that literally killed a person to an artistic form of expression, a movie that was screened at Cannes and won many awards and is ranked second on the list of the Sundance Film Festival’s Top 10 films of All Time.
Obviously, I don’t think you’re a big enough idiot to have meant that seriously, it was clearly satirical.
Not a straw man. An actual point.
the dude died on stream , and then the people who tortured him to death sat around after he died, still streaming his dead body , and talked about what to tell the police, before they called emergency services. and here you guys are, arguing in their favor, calling it censorship that Kick is getting fined, and debating on whether the torture is “simulated”.
That’s a good summary of my point, though I’m not sure why you think it’s a “strawman” and it certainly wasn’t satirical.
A strawman fallacy involves misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to attack. I, however, accurately represented your argument and then used an **analogy ** to highlight its flaws. An analogy is a rhetorical tool used to explain a concept by comparing it to something similar. In this case, I was responding directly to your question about why it matters if torture is simulated, and if it’s ok to be streamed.
My point, which you seem to have somehow missed, is that we have a clear precedent for broadcasting simulated torture. And, as you so helpfully pointed out, simulated torture not only is ok to be streamed, but it can also receive acclaim and awards.
I’m glad we agree that simulated torture can be broadcast.
you’re point was fucking stupid. you compared a torture-only steam that psychopaths watched to satisfy their perverse need to see humans suffer, which actually fucking killed someone, to an award-winning movie where nobody was hurt and the torture was not the point.
what else do you feel is no different than Reservoir Dogs? beheading videos from Afghanistan? rape videos? animal torture? CSAM? or are those only OK if they are “simulated”?
either way, you seem like a pretty disgusting person.
lol, so now I can go into pointing out your logical fallacies… but, honestly I’ve already spent more than enough time on this conversation with someone who is clearly very toxic. Thanks for the quick response and for validating my initial impression that you’re someone whose opinion I can happily live without, and welcome to my blocked list.
oh no!
anyway.
Would you watch a torture scene if you’re not sure it is simulated or not?
In a movie? It’s Surely fake. On a livestream? I won’t be so sure.
Source
Just a nitpick, “jeu de mort” would never be translated as “death game”. In this context “de mort” would be an intensifier like “fucking” or “damned”.
I see. It is google translate though (the translation duckduckgo provided was even more horrendous).
By how it reads, it kind of looks like more of a Jack-ass situation if voluntary abuse. There was some mention of him getting shot with paint balls. Also, the autopsy report said he had no trauma.
Physical trauma maybe
Well sure, it could have been something he drank, or maybe he wanted to kill himself and took something on purpose. We’ll probably end up finding out more at some point.
If that is the case then I’d like to see how aware they were of what was happening. I’d push for criminal charges against management in that case.
Kick CEO was a top 5 donor to the channel in question. Not only did they know, they actively encouraged it.
OK, but - could he not leave? Or say “i do not want to”? I don’t get it
Apparently he tried to but they refused
“Sure you can leave, but this will end the stream marathon, the three of us will lose money over it, and our community will be quite upset with you. But yeah, you can leave. Alright.”
Nice victim blaming.
No, no, not at all, i just do not unterstand it.
A person with a intellectual disability will often be easier for abusers to manipulate and may not value their own well-being over the abusers approval
I mean, i get that the platform has obviously shitty security features, but more outrage should be directed towards the two asswipe streamers that actually tortured the guy.
He actively wanted out as seen by the desperate text sent to his mother saying how he “felt like a hostage” that was read aloud by one of his abusers on stream, but due to coersion both financially and socially. In one of the streams his abusers openly brag about how if he doesnt participate in their “game” they’ll take the keys for his car and his apartment until he does.
There’s generally a lot of factors that add up to staying in an abusive situation. From his point of view its likely that there didn’t seem much of an option for him outside of this.
Yeah, so go after these fuckos. They deserve even more outrage than the plattform which has obvious shitty protection protocolls
He could.
He may have been very emotionally broken that he can’t think rationally . Everybody has completly different tolerability levels. The teo guys who tortured him could still have say no too so they are responsible
The fuck