←back to thread

Blizzard Suspends Professional Hearthstone Player for Hong Kong Comments

(playhearthstone.com)
2525 points hownottowrite | 10 comments | 08 Oct 19 09:23 UTC | HN request time: 0.974s | source | bottom
Show context
diveanon ◴[08 Oct 19 10:17 UTC] No.21190558[source]▶
Can we please start a cultural movement that forces large corporations to choose between appeasing Chinese censors and looking like fools to the rest of the west or getting banned in China.

Really seems like a win win scenario.

replies(8): >>21190604 #>>21190677 #>>21190678 #>>21190695 #>>21190877 #>>21191194 #>>21192899 #>>21194978 #
nabla9 ◴[08 Oct 19 10:32 UTC] No.21190677[source]▶
How about Chinese owners?

Chinese Tencent owns 5 percent of Blizzard, if full owner of Riot Games, 48% of Epic Games, 11.5% of Bluehole (Fortnite and PUBG), 5% of Ubisoft. They are also investor in Discord. https://www.pcgamer.com/every-game-company-that-tencent-has-...

AMC is fully owned by Chinese. The largest movie theater chain in the United States is fully owned by Chinese.

Legendary Entertainment Group is owned by Chinese.

Forbes Media sold majority stake to Chinese company.

replies(12): >>21190726 #>>21190893 #>>21190894 #>>21190916 #>>21190992 #>>21191011 #>>21191117 #>>21191545 #>>21191748 #>>21191916 #>>21192238 #>>21192470 #
diveanon ◴[08 Oct 19 10:40 UTC] No.21190726[source]▶
Make them choose between the two markets.

I'm tired of the idea that the Western and Chinese markets can both be appeased the middle of the road morality.

What is happening in HK right now is wrong, and the west has fought wars over this very issue.

replies(4): >>21190762 #>>21190782 #>>21190797 #>>21191335 #
TeMPOraL ◴[08 Oct 19 10:45 UTC] No.21190762[source]▶
> and the west has fought wars over this very issue

Which ones?

Also, China has nukes, we probably don't want to see that war starting. I don't think there's a good military option available.

replies(2): >>21190815 #>>21190983 #
1. atroche ◴[08 Oct 19 10:51 UTC] No.21190815[source]▶
Do they have the capacity to hit targets in the continental US without winning naval supremacy?
replies(5): >>21190832 #>>21190833 #>>21190888 #>>21190903 #>>21190909 #
2. nabla9 ◴[08 Oct 19 10:55 UTC] No.21190833[source]▶
Yes.
3. TeMPOraL ◴[08 Oct 19 10:55 UTC] No.21190832[source]▶
I don't think the navy can do anything about ICBMs, but even if, they can start by nuking the US navy.
replies(2): >>21191066 #>>21191140 #
4. amdavidson ◴[08 Oct 19 11:03 UTC] No.21190888[source]▶
Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-41
5. atroche ◴[08 Oct 19 11:07 UTC] No.21190903[source]▶
I probably should’ve done a quick search instead of asking:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/china-para...

6. baq ◴[08 Oct 19 11:07 UTC] No.21190909[source]▶
They can launch people into orbit and safely bring them back. Hitting a ground target with an ICBM is about the same difficulty.
7. arethuza ◴[08 Oct 19 11:31 UTC] No.21191066[source]▶
The US Navy does appear to have an ABM capability on some of its ships:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Ballistic_Missile_Defens...

replies(2): >>21191156 #>>21191569 #
8. merpnderp ◴[08 Oct 19 11:44 UTC] No.21191140[source]▶
They can't nuke the subs, who's primary purpose is to ensure retaliation, which hopefully the fear of keeps countries from launching nukes.
9. TeMPOraL ◴[08 Oct 19 11:46 UTC] No.21191156{3}[source]▶
Good to know. Now the question is, can the newest AEGIS deal with China's newest hypersonic ICBMs. It's a question I very much don't want to see answered through actual test.
10. vonmoltke ◴[08 Oct 19 12:40 UTC] No.21191569{3}[source]▶
As noted in that article, the system is ineffective (officially, at least) against ICBMs. It only works against ballistic missiles that don't leave the atmosphere.