Latest news with #streamers
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Fortnite streamer forced to ban 15-year-old fan from his Twitch chat after he donated him $36,000
As technology and social media become increasingly embedded in our lives, people become more fearful as to how it may affect people - specifically younger generations. And as a popular Twitch streamer learned, children who are given unlimited access online tend to make some questionable decisions. Cody Conrod, or 'Clix,' is a popular pro Fortnite streamer with more than eight million followers. This means that he plays the online game on a live stream, all while interacting with subscribers and fans. These fans have the ability to donate real money to streamers, usually as an indication that they enjoy their content. While this is typically something a streamer would be happy about, Clix found himself in a situation where he was contemplating sending the money back to a viewer. Reddit users reposted a clip from Clix's stream, along with the title 'Fortnite Streamer Clix bans a 14-year-old in his Twitch chat for donating over $36,000 to him in a month.' After listening to the clip, it's revealed that the fan, Lucas, is 15 years old and donated $35,000 to streamers. Clix tries to make sense of the situation. 'You [made] $18K profit this year, you spent $35K on streamers, and now you want to quit the one thing that's making you revenue after you just spent all your money?' Clix asked the boy, incredulous. From the conversation, one can surmise that this 15-year-old boy is also a streamer who makes a good amount of profit - but also uses double that on other streamers. The boy confirms this information and says, 'Yeah, 'cause I don't enjoy it.' 'Dude, I don't want to promote refunds... but like, bro. Why the f**k did you spend $35,000?' Clix continued. Clix then tells Lucas that he makes 'millions and millions' of dollars but still wouldn't donate 'more than $2,000' to streamers a month. Lucas goes on to explain that he gets a 'dopamine rush' anytime a streamer says his name - 'it's addicting,' he said. In response, Clix first asks Lucas if his parents are 'financially stable' and then 'financially well,' and Lucas responds 'Yeah' to both.' When asked why he finally stopped, Lucas admits that his father found out and was 'annoyed.' From the clip, it's hard to tell what Clix ended up doing in the situation since he said goodbye to Lucas and the young fan said he was going to bed, but based on the title of the Reddit thread, it's assumed that he eventually banned the streamer for the irresponsible behavior. And Reddit users agreed with action while in disbelief that a teenager would have access to that much money - and then spend it so frivolously. 'This is my question. Where's this money coming from? Because if it's his parents' money, how have they not noticed?!' one Reddit user said. 'Kid donated my yearly salary to a streamer over the course of a month... Jesus Christ,' another added. 'Kids are f***ing stupid and have access to mom and dads credit card. What do you expect?' one user said, summarizing the situation. 'Plus, this type of media glorifies it because you can be seen in front of thousands of others, generating a false sense of popularity.'
ABC News
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- ABC News
What is Stop Killing Games? Millions back EU petition to shape future of video game industry
Across the internet in recent weeks, influencers, streamers and video game fans have been calling for laws to "stop killing games". It's part of a grassroots initiative that has been picked up around the world, including in Australia, and is now picking up speed as it makes an eleventh-hour push for signatures on a petition to the European Union. This is what to know about the Stop Killing Games movement, and why it's getting so much attention. If you bought a game for your Nintendo 64 back in 1999, you could still dust it off, plug it into your console and boot it up to this day. But the same isn't possible for many released in recent years. That's because more games than ever require an internet connection to play, usually via online servers hosted by the developer. But when those companies decide they no longer want to keep the servers operating, they can shut them down and render the game unplayable. These games are usually sold for around the same prices as titles that can be played years down the line and aren't marketed as having a life span. Essentially, it's an issue of consumer rights. The Stop Killing Games movement says the issue also has bigger implications than just the video games industry. "The practice of a seller destroying a product someone has already paid for represents a radical assault on consumer rights and even the concept of ownership itself," its organisers wrote in an FAQ on its official website. "If this practice does not stop, it may be codified into law and spread to other products of more importance over time, such as agricultural equipment, educational products, medical devices, etc. "It is important consumers maintain a basic level of rights so as to not be overrun by predatory practices." Frustration around this practice of developers shutting down games has existed for years. But when Ubisoft announced plans to shutter its online racing game The Crew in 2024 and render the game unplayable, the situation reached a boiling point. Ross Scott, who runs the YouTube channel Accursed Farms, had been reporting news updates about developers destroying games for years, but believed The Crew was the clearest case of a consumer rights violation he'd seen in the space. He told his audience at the time he intended to pursue legal proceedings against Ubisoft, with the intention of setting a legal precedent against the practice. Out of that, the Stop Killing Games initiative was born. Since April 2024, supporters of the initiative in several countries have pushed for legislation to discourage the practice of destroying games consumers have already purchased. Supporters are asking for laws that would require games to stay in a working state when developers end support. "The irony is, most video games already do this," Mr Scott said. Stop Killing Games says two of the ways this can be achieved is by: The initiative is not calling for developers to be required to run servers for their games forever. "It's unreasonable to expect a developer to support a game forever," says Seán McLoughlin, who goes by jacksepticeye online, in a video posted to his YouTube channel. "I don't think anyone would expect that. But if a developer wants to stop supporting a game … put stuff in place where you can hand it over to the consumers, where they can start supporting it themselves, and put stuff out, and we can still enjoy the game." The movement's petition to the European Union has received an eleventh-hour groundswell of support, bringing the issue into mainstream discourse. The petition, which closes on July 31, had 12 months to collect at least 1 million verified statements of support in order to bring the matter before the EU's main executive body, the European Commission. For most of that time, it appeared as though it would fall short. But when prominent video game influencers, including PewDiePie, jacksepticeye, MoistCr1TiKaL, and Minecraft creator Notch offered public statements of support, the petition saw a massive boost. In little over a fortnight, it shot from around 454,000 signatures to 1.3 million. There are a few reasons. For one, getting enough signatures would guarantee the issue goes before the European Commission, meaning there's a better chance the EU will consider legislating against developers destroying games they have sold to customers. Mr Scott is hopeful that if the EU, or even Australia, introduces new laws, they would be enough to tip the scales worldwide. "The costs of implementing 'end of life' plans are trivial when compared to the potential profits from selling in those markets," he said. "At that point, I think it will become standard practice in the industry, because that is what will become the most profitable." This flow-on effect has been seen before. In 2022, the European Union ruled all smartphones sold within the bloc must be capable of being charged with a USB-C connection. That meant Apple was forced to abandon its brand-specific Lightning cables to comply, and rather than manufacturing models just for Europe, the company implemented the change worldwide. Similarly, in 2017, gaming company Valve lost a case against Australia's consumer watchdog, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), in the federal court for misleading customers about their rights to refunds for faulty games. Valve, which owns the gaming platform Steam and has more than 2 million Australian accounts, only offered refunds on a case-by-case basis. But the court upheld that, according to Australian Consumer Law, every business selling products in the country was required to provide refunds for faulty products. Mr Scott attributes the case for prompting Valve to offer refunds on purchases with less than 2 hours of playtime for up to 14 days. Stop Killing Games has already received some optimistic commentary from the EU, with Vice-President Nicolae Ștefănuță voicing his full support and signing the petition. Emphasis has also been placed on Stop Killing Games's European Union petition because it marks one of the last avenues the initiative can pursue to see governments take up the matter. Past actions in countries such as Canada, the US and Brazil have so far turned up dead ends. In response to a class action lawsuit over the shutdown of The Crew, Ubisoft lawyer Steven A Marenberg argued the game's packaging made clear the game required an internet connection to be played, and that Ubisoft retained the right to revoke access at its own discretion. Having been able to play the game for years, he argued players "cannot complain now that they were deceived simply because Ubisoft did not then create an offline version of the discontinued game", he wrote in a filing obtained by Polygon. Video Games Europe, a trade association representing the continent's video game industry, has been critical of the Stop Killing Games initiative. In a statement released in early July, it said private servers were not a practical option for many online-only games. "We understand that it can be disappointing for players but, when it does happen, the industry ensures that players are given fair notice of the prospective changes in compliance with local consumer protection laws," the statement reads. "Private servers are not always a viable alternative option for players as the protections we put in place to secure players' data, remove illegal content, and combat unsafe community content would not exist and would leave rights holders liable. "In addition, many titles are designed from the ground-up to be online-only; in effect, these proposals would curtail developer choice by making these video games prohibitively expensive to create." A longer position statement argued such laws as Stop Killing Games is pursuing would erode intellectual property rights of developers and raise the costs of developing such games, creating a "chilling effect on game design". It added that forcing developers to allow privately run servers would risk reputational harm and expose players to security risks and "illegal or harmful content or conduct" in the absence of moderation. Mr Scott rejected the suggestion that requiring developers to have end-of-life plans in place would be too costly. "While it's not practical for all existing games, which we acknowledge, the costs to implement 'end of life' plans for games in the future can be utterly minimal," he said, adding that most games already allowed for continued play after support ended. He noted that the EU was an "enormous market" with a population of more than 450 million, meaning the potential profits from selling games there would outweigh the costs of implementing such plans. Other studios, including Warhammer 40,000 developer Owlcat Studios, have expressed support for the petition. Yes. Stop Killing Games petitioned the federal government last year, collecting more than 10,000 signatures. Former MP Stephen Jones, who was the assistant treasurer and financial services minister at the time, responded with a letter outlining current consumer law but did not commit to pursuing legislation. The ACCC said developers should be clear to consumers about whether they were purchasing a game as a product, or just a licence to play it. A spokesperson for the commission said "there is no requirement under the ACL that game developers need to continue to provide access to a game, or support the operation of a game, for any defined period of time". "If consumers are impacted by a game developer changing the nature of the product or service they have purchased and believe they have been misled, they should contact the business in first instance to try to resolve the issue. "They should also report the matter to the ACCC and their local state or territory consumer affairs or fair trading agency."
Telegraph
23-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
Disney's new drama brushes aside the evils of slavery for a tale of derring-do
Of the many epic adventures that have appeared on television in the last five or so years, few have been as gripping as the streamers' attempts to conquer family viewing. Washington Black (Disney+), a sprawling picaresque that follows a young, brilliant, plantation slave called George 'Wash' Black (played by Eddie Karanja as a child and Ernest Kingsley Junior as an adult) is the latest attempt. Beginning on Barbados in 1837, Wash's potential is spotted immediately by a British abolitionist and amateur scientist called Titch (Tom Ellis), and together they work to build a Heath-Robinson flying machine. When Wash is involved in the killing of a white man – maybe he did it, maybe he didn't – who is the evil plantation owner's brother no less, he hitches up with Titch, fires up the airship and makes his escape. There follows many an episode of derring-do as they make their way north, first to Virginia, then up through Nova Scotia, on round the Arctic and finally down into Europe and eventually North Africa. All the while a scowling bounty hunter is on Wash's tail, for jeopardy and plot propulsion. Modern television abhors a linear narrative, and so this big-budget, period globe-trotting is intercut with two other stories. In the early episodes we flash-forward to Wash eight years later, hiding out in Halifax, Nova Scotia as a grown man. He has maintained and cultivated his interest in science to the best that a former slave in hiding possibly can, so when a renowned British botanist called Goff (Rupert Graves, good as ever) gets off the boat, there's finally a chance for Wash to fulfil his ambitions. Unfortunately, but also fortunately for Wash, Goff arrives with his daughter Tanna (Iola Evans). Unbeknownst to her, she has been lined up by her father for an arranged marriage and so when she inevitably falls for Wash, she, he and her dad all find themselves in a right inter-generational pickle. Washington Black is therefore attempting to do a lot of things at once. It is a bowdlerised Underground Railroad that is nonetheless a salutary reminder to younger viewers of the wickedness of slavery. It is also a rousing, Around the World in 80 Days-style hop-and-stop that doesn't want you to think too hard about the wickedness of slavery because this is supposed to be fun. And there is Romeo and Juliet in there too, a tale of forbidden love and tragic romance that, by having Tanna as a black woman passing as white, has things to say about social discrimination and prejudice. The show certainly makes a better fist of this kind of four-quadrant viewing than, say, Amazon's recent Nautilus. That was a similarly grand confection about Captain Nemo and his submarine that foundered on a duff script. (Interestingly, it was originally a Disney production and you wonder if they ditched it because a better version of the same thing – this – came along.) Still, however, Washington Black underestimates younger viewers. Its hero is too heroic when the story demands it (he is stoical, a genius and even a dab hand with watercolours) and then suddenly too fallible when it doesn't (he goes sub aqua in a copper bell helmet, is told specifically that there's a valve for the oxygen, but then Dr Science somehow nearly suffocates). The characters all speak in cue-card aphorisms of the sort that primary school teachers pin to the walls. Even the doomed love story is too predictably doomed. My suspicion – and it is only a suspicion, bearing in mind that I sit squarely in the dull and crusty demographic – is that trying to please a young audience by sanitising a slave narrative won't work. Challenging your viewers has got to be better than patronising them. Washington Black looks at those moral grey areas but chooses to present the world in black and white.
Independent Singapore
22-07-2025
- Independent Singapore
Man reconsiders BTO plans after wife repeatedly lied about using male online streaming app and spending over S$3k on virtual gifts
SINGAPORE: A man shared on social media that he is now having second thoughts about applying for a (Build-to-Order) BTO flat with his wife after she repeatedly lied about using a male online streaming app and spending over S$3,000 on virtual gifts. On Monday (Jul 21), he took to the r/SingaporeRaw subreddit to seek advice. In his post, he said that when he first caught her sending expensive gifts to male singers from China, she dismissed his concerns and deleted both the app and her messaging accounts so that he 'could not see their conversations.' He also discovered that she had been spending close to S$300 on each transaction to send virtual gifts to the male streamers, and as his job sometimes requires him to travel overseas, he started to worry that one of the streamers might use the opportunity to approach her in person while he was gone. His wife, however, brushed off his worries. She reassured him that nothing like that would ever happen and promised that she would stop using the app and spending money on it entirely. Still, worried that his wife might return to the streaming platform, the man turned to a trusted female friend who was familiar with the online community. He asked her to help monitor whether his wife would become active again, as he no longer felt confident checking on his own without causing further conflict at home. Unfortunately, just a few days later, the friend reported troubling news. His wife had created a new sub-account under a different username and had resumed both watching the male streamers and sending virtual gifts. He confronted his wife once more. This time, she admitted that she had re-downloaded the app and was using it again, but insisted she had not topped up any money. She claimed she was only watching casually and had no intention of spending on it. However, that, too, turned out to be untrue. According to his friend, the account was actively making payments, and the amount being spent was much bigger this time. 'At this point, she admitted to me that she spent slightly less than S$2k, all in the span of two weeks,' he shared. 'We had another huge quarrel, and she promised to quit, as I said I wanted a divorce and custody of the kids.' However, the cycle repeated itself. Just days later, his friend informed him that yet another account had appeared. Although his wife initially denied it, she later admitted the truth when he caught her himself and confirmed that she was indeed the one using that account. The man said that this time, his wife had spent another S$1,000. 'This time round, I did not budge, I insisted to have a divorce and she broke down, begging me to stay. At that point of time, I wanted to leave the house, she threatened to E her lif4 if I chose to leave this marriage,' he said. 'I had no choice but to stay. All these happen in the span of three weeks, from the start of her downloading the app till this date,' he wrote. See also Hyerim shows off wedding invitation card designed by friends The man added that although he wanted to give their marriage another chance, his wife's repeated dishonesty had completely broken his trust. 'We have been married for the past 7-8 years since 2018. We now have 2 kids, aged 5 and 3, and a flat(resale) as well…but I find it very hard to continue this marriage,' he wrote. 'I did try to carry on for the kids and gave her many chances.. but I also feel that carrying on is pointless, even though I do love her, but I do not think I can cope another lie of hers.' He ended his post by asking others if they had faced similar situations, and whether it was time to walk away. 'Can any of the fellow redditors help a fellow Singaporean out in this? I would really appreciate for any advice or thoughts. I am really feeling helpless and loss in this situation,' he wrote. 'Divorce her and save your kids that trauma.' In the thread, many Singaporean Redditors felt that the man had already given his wife more than enough chances and urged him to leave before things got worse. One told him, 'She sounds like she has no remorse and is unrepentant. You might wanna cut your losses while you're still young. The kids shouldn't be learning from a parent like her.' Another commented, 'Hi, coming from a dad whose addiction to alcohol made my childhood a living nightmare, divorce her and save your kids that trauma. I understand that you love your wife and want to believe/rebulid a relationship with her, but the moment you first hesitated to apply a BTO with her, ask yourself why did you hesitate.' A third wrote, 'If you have any pride as a man, you would divorce her.' Still, not everyone advocated for separation. A handful of Redditors suggested that the man explore professional help before making any final decisions. One said, 'Go to an expert. Make an appointment with a marriage counsellor. Get her some additional help for her addiction, too. This is not a situation where you should fully rely on answers from strangers online. Reference, yes, but don't take any of it at face value. I hope you can work this out.' In other news, a man took to Reddit to share that his brother is being worked to the bone under a gruelling new shift system that is taking a toll on his health and sleep. Posting on r/askSingapore on Thursday (Jul 17), the man explained that his brother was already working long hours from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Recently, however, his company introduced a new shift system that now forces him to return for additional late-night work. According to him, his brother is now required to return to work on certain nights from 10 p.m. to 2:30 a.m. and sometimes even as late as 6 a.m. Read more: 'His whole body clock is gone': Man shares his brother's company makes him work from 10 pm to 6 am once or twice a week, and it's destroying his health Featured image by freepik (for illustration purposes only)
The Review Geek
10-07-2025
- Entertainment
- The Review Geek
Has The Gringo Hunters been renewed for Season 2? Here's what we know:
Renewed or Cancelled? The Gringo Hunters is the latest crime drama series on Netflix, armed with a simple but effective story, compelling characters and 12 episodes of action-packed thrills. Having watched the first season in its entirety, you may be wondering if this one has been renewed or cancelled. Well, wonder no more! What is The Gringo Hunters about? Split across 12 crazy episodes, The Gringo Hunters follows a unit of Tijuana police who work to track down U.S. fugitives in Mexico. The Gringo Hunters set out to try and find these individuals, all the while wrestling with their own interpersonal issues. Has The Gringo Hunters been renewed for Season 2? At the time of writing, The Gringo Hunters has not been renewed for season 2. Generally Netflix would gauge numerous metrics before renewing a show, including how many people initially watch it and then looking at the drop-off rate. With some shows, cancellations or renewals happen quickly. Other times, it can take months before a decision over a show's future is made. So far, The Gringo Hunters has had a pretty mixed reaction online from audiences and critics alike. Given the way this show is set up, and the ending we receive, we're predicting that this will not be renewed for a second season. Mexican series tend to be quite hit or miss on the streamer regarding views and this one could go either way. Having said that, we do also know that completion rate is a massive metric for these streamers so that could play a pivotal role here. For now, we'll have to wait and see what happens but it does seem like we'll be seeing more of Nico, Gloria and Camila in the future! What we know about season 2 so far: Barely anything is known about The Gringo Hunters season 2 at this point given Netflix haven't officially renewed or cancelled this one. Given the first season's conclusion, it does seem like it could be brought back for another case to tackle, but we'll have to wait and see. The show ends the main case but does leave things open for a potential sequel. If it does return, expect another 12 episode season order and the main cast and crew to return. We will update this page when more information becomes available, so be sure to check this page out in the near future. Would you like to see The Gringo Hunters return for a second season? What's been your favourite part of the show? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!
