Gamer Streams Pay-Per-View UFC Fight By Pretending To Play It (theverge.com) 75
WheezyJoe writes: A pay-per-view UFC Match was streamed in its entirety on Twitch and other platforms by a gamer pretending he was "playing" the fight as a game. The gamer, AJ Lester, appearing in the corner of the image holding his game controller, made off like he was controlling the action of the "game" when in fact he was re-broadcasting the fight for free. A tweet showing Lester's antics went viral with over 63,000 retweets and 140,000 likes at the time of publication. Another clip shows him reacting wildly yelling "oooooooooooooooh!!!" and "damnnnnnn!" in response to the match.
He WAS playing the game. (Score:1)
The game looks very realistic.
Don't worry I know what to do (Score:3, Funny)
Hit up up down down left right left right about a b a b select start and it'll break the combo.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You can always tell someone is too young to remember the Konami code when they get it wrong like that.
BTW, it's up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A.
Re: (Score:1)
I did that on Windows 10 and it wiped the drive and installed Linux... Good to know for my next trip to Costco or Best Buy.
Re: (Score:2)
You say that as if it's a bad thing . . .
Technology is making us obsolete (Score:5, Interesting)
We live in interesting times...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Would you watch a stream of programmers typing on their keyboards? No, because it's pointless.
Humans watch other humans playing sports because they're too fucking lazy to play sports themselves.
Oh, "for the teams", you say? That's tribalism, meaning you have the same brain processes as cavemen.
Re: (Score:3)
You mean someone would pay to watch me hack a server?
You know why "hacking" in movies is unrealistic? Because the reality is FUCKING BORING to watch. Even if you know what the person is doing, it's by no means a spectator sport. Twice so if you have no idea what's going on.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you find hacking tutorials but watching someone hack a server for entertainment purposes is unheard of.
Re: (Score:3)
You mean someone would pay to watch me hack a server?
You know why "hacking" in movies is unrealistic? Because the reality is FUCKING BORING to watch. Even if you know what the person is doing, it's by no means a spectator sport. Twice so if you have no idea what's going on.
HACK THE PLANET!
Re: (Score:1)
Would you watch a stream of programmers typing on their keyboards? No, because it's pointless.
Yes, I have watched programming streams. No, it is not pointless - it sometimes shows me things hat I didn't think of or know about previously.
I don't watch it as a sport. I can easily envision a market for it however.
It may not be appealing to you. That said, you are an individual, and there are many more people out in the world whose taste differs from yours.
Re: (Score:2)
That's called tutorials. That's more like watching a National Geographic special about some rare bird species than watching a football match.
Re: Technology is making us obsolete (Score:2)
I.e., it's a lot more interesting?
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Technology is making us obsolete (Score:4, Interesting)
Entertainment options such as movies are handicapped from the outset by predetermined outcomes. "Humans watch other humans playing sports" do so, because it's one of the the few things you can watch in which the outcome has yet to be determined.
"Oh, "for the teams", you say? That's tribalism, meaning you have the same brain processes as cavemen."
We are the descendants of a long line of tribal people, fighting the instinct to team up or die. For a factual, current example, consider political alignment.
Re: (Score:2)
Entertainment options such as movies are handicapped from the outset by predetermined outcomes
cough cough "Apollo13" cough cough
Knowing the outcome may make a move suck for you, but not for rather a lot of us.
Re: (Score:2)
Would you watch a stream of programmers typing on their keyboards? No, because it's pointless.
Humans watch other humans playing sports because they're too fucking lazy to play sports themselves.
I think you missed the point. Lord of the Rings was mostly programmers typing on keyboards, but that is not the end product that people paid to see.
Oh, "for the teams", you say? That's tribalism, meaning you have the same brain processes as cavemen.
Exactly, so what is the difference between watching a real human on TV, and a computer generated photo-realistic human on TV when your brain can't tell the difference? Sure we're not quite there yet, but it's only a couple of years away
Re: (Score:1)
Would you watch a stream of programmers typing on their keyboards? No, because it's pointless.
Humans watch other humans playing sports because they're too fucking lazy to play sports themselves.
Oh, "for the teams", you say? That's tribalism, meaning you have the same brain processes as cavemen.
https://developers.slashdot.or... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Our brains still work for groups of 5 to 10 individuals. Not more. You will NEVER have any kind of strong "feelings" for anyone outside that 5 to 10 people group. Whether it's work or your private life, yes, you might work for a large corporation with thousands of people, but the only ones you really care about are the maybe 5 or 10 people in your immediate organization group.
That is, by the way, the very reason these groups are organized that way. Because that's the size of groups that we can handle instin
Re: (Score:2)
Our brains still work for groups of 5 to 10 individuals. Not more. You will NEVER have any kind of strong "feelings" for anyone outside that 5 to 10 people group. Whether it's work or your private life, yes, you might work for a large corporation with thousands of people, but the only ones you really care about are the maybe 5 or 10 people in your immediate organization group.
That is, by the way, the very reason these groups are organized that way. Because that's the size of groups that we can handle instinctively.
And here I thought it was because managers couldn't stand writing more than 10 performance reviews.
Re: (Score:1)
Why do athletes watch sport on TV? Because they like to watch sports.
The same reason why gamers watch twitch.
Re: (Score:1)
There's a Stream for that too!
https://www.twitch.tv/electrik... [twitch.tv]
https://www.twitch.tv/director... [twitch.tv]
Re: (Score:1)
Plenty of people watch programmers streaming - ignoring other sources - twitch has a 'community' dedicated to it https://www.twitch.tv/communities/programming
Re: Technology is making us obsolete (Score:2)
Re: Technology is making us obsolete (Score:1)
Sorry for your lack of autism.
Good luck... (Score:4, Insightful)
Good luck with your legal fees dude.
Re: (Score:1)
exactly, the broadcasters have a history of not taking these sort of things lightly and depending on how many people viewed it he could be in for serious financial trouble.
Re: (Score:1)
Sure (Score:3, Insightful)
UFC has the depth of a videogame. Lol wtf.
Is that "Fair use"? (Score:3)
It could be that by the time it comes to trial, if that's how it works out, the courts will have been seeded with people for whom "fair use" means "pay us now or pay us later".
Re: (Score:1)
Mst3k needs rights, so I'm guessing this is a violation.
They do the live stream commentary to get around that at times (as riff tracks live), but the theatre still needs the rights to play the original thing they live comment over (and to their live commentary if it's a stream).
Re: (Score:1)
I would think it's for a jury to decide, I think a judge would allow a fair use defense, and a jury decide if the facts fit such a case.
My instinct would be that it violates fair use as it uses a substantial amount of the original (100%), can be used as a substitute for the original (to a point), the original
permeates approaching 100% of the combined product, in the case of MST3k: it is a commercialized combining, and lastly, the original is a large percentage of the overall end product (80% of the screen a
Re: (Score:2)
I could see how it might be "parody"
I don't. US copyright laws may be stupid at times, but it's absurd to believe that his intentions included parody at the time. He's free to claim whatever he wants in court, but he bears the burden of proof when he claims fair use.
And if the chatter surrounding this event was "hey man, you can watch the UFC fight for free on the stream"... he's gonna lose so badly.
the courts will have been seeded with people for whom "fair use" means "pay us now or pay us later"
I'm not sure what you're implying here, but there is an established guideline for deciding whether something is fair use. It's not like someone i
Twitch.tv has it (Score:2)
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2... [twitch.tv]
MST3K (Score:1)
Reminds me of Mystery Science Theater 3000.
What an ass. (Score:2)
Thanks for making me lose 3 minutes of my time. (Score:2)
"News for nerds, stuff that matters."
It took me a while to understand what it was about. (I had too look up "UFC")
A kid streaming a pirated video of an UFC fight pretending to play a video game.
I don't know how news about various science breakthrough will survive after this.
As far as I'm concerned, if we had the power to mod an article, this one would be reaching an msb set to 1 followed by a stream of zeroes.