Google launches new anti-troll AI to the internet. And trolls troll right back with Operation Google.

[Atmos]

22 hours ago, That Norwegian Guy said:

Because there are plenty of alternatives that aren't solely meant to disparage and incite anger?

 

Name ONE benefit of using the 6-letter N word in place of "black". One single reason.

Equality.

Blacks can call each other that, and often do. Anyone else though? No, it's forbidden. Suddenly then it becomes racist and forbidden.

 

How about instead of banning words... words... we take the power away from them? Words cannot hurt you, plain and simple.

Even star trek had the right idea back in 1969.

 

[stconquest]

Wow, some of you guys are fucking dumbasses.

 

[Centurius]

On 23/09/2016 at 0:01 PM, FakezZ said:

HAHAHAHAHA gotta love the internet. Just due to its sheer size there will always be someone who will think of just the right way to counter a problem. This coupled with the anonymity is the true power it has. Also, fuck censorship. You don't like something someone has to say? Ignore him. Losing the right to free speech is a lot more frightening than some people's feelings getting hurt over some shit a 12-year-old or a grown up man/woman-baby have to say.

Most places on the Internet you don't have and never had  a right to free speech.

[FakezZ]

2 hours ago, Centurius said:

Most places on the Internet you don't have and never had  a right to free speech.

And you think this is fine?

[Centurius]

2 hours ago, FakezZ said:

And you think this is fine?

Yes, websites are private property. Freedom of speech only covers government retaliation, it does not and should not let people circumvent rules on private property or prevent being called out for shit. 

[MageTank]

On 9/23/2016 at 7:01 AM, That Norwegian Guy said:

Because there are plenty of alternatives that aren't solely meant to disparage and incite anger?

 

Name ONE benefit of using the 6-letter N word in place of "black". One single reason.

One single reason? To desensitize the word and reduce its intended meaning to near nothingness. You know, kind of how "black" people do so now? Except it's racist for white people to use a word they use to describe themselves. As long as they segregate which race can use which words, while still using said word themselves, racism can never die. 

 

Meanings of words change over time. However, context is always important. A white person can have a black friend, say the word to them, and not have any hateful intent behind it. Yet it's still frowned upon, because "THAT'S OUR WORD"? We live in a backwards society when people think they can take a term they deem hateful, change its meaning internally, yet still get offended when others use the word. If you don't want a word to be said, don't say it yourself. If you use the word, you automatically invite others to use it as well. 

 

 

[spartaman64]

10 hours ago, LAwLz said:

At the risk of sounding like a racist, I can think of plenty of reasons why someone might want to use the word nigger.

It's the same reason why we use any swearwords, and that's emphasis or intention to hurt. If you're really mad at some black person then you shouting "you black person!" will sound really silly, but if you shout "you nigger" then all of a sudden the sentence has a real impact, because of the history.

"Shut up" and "shut the fuck up" have two different levels of seriousness to them as well.

 

Like someone at /pol/ was hinting at but never said is that it's not the words that are bad, it's the intent. Some people are probably wincing that I used "the n word" in this post but I don't think that's a problem, because it was not used with the intent of hurting someone. It was used for emphasis.

And that's what the person at /pol/ was getting at. You can ban words if you want, but as long as people have the intent of hurting others then will just start using other words to express their thoughts/feelings.

In the last couple of years "white male" has become a derogatory term used by SJWs.

 

Speaking of "white male", I find that phrase offensive because it is often used by SJWs with the intention to hurt/belittle someone. Does that mean that the phrase should be added to the list of "bad words" we are no longer allowed to say? If it's not, why not? Why is "white male" OK but "nigger" not OK? Who gets to decide that? To me, the phrase "white male" is more offensive. Aren't my feelings just as important to protect as those of a black person?

So different people will find different things offensive, so where do we draw the line? You can find people being offended by essentially anything, so we can't just cater to the lowest common denominator because then all speech would be banned.

i dont think you would get the impact you want. it communicates that you have a disdain for a certain race of people. and i agree that intention is important in this for example if you say my nigga to someone as a gesture of friendship thats acceptable. but i cant think of an instance where the word wouldnt be borderline racist if you use it as a derogatory term because the word is derogatory because of its history and its history was it is used by racists to classify a race as subhuman 

[spartaman64]

2 hours ago, MageTank said:

One single reason? To desensitize the word and reduce its intended meaning to near nothingness. You know, kind of how "black" people do so now? Except it's racist for white people to use a word they use to describe themselves. As long as they segregate which race can use which words, while still using said word themselves, racism can never die. 

 

Meanings of words change over time. However, context is always important. A white person can have a black friend, say the word to them, and not have any hateful intent behind it. Yet it's still frowned upon, because "THAT'S OUR WORD"? We live in a backwards society when people think they can take a term they deem hateful, change its meaning internally, yet still get offended when others use the word. If you don't want a word to be said, don't say it yourself. If you use the word, you automatically invite others to use it as well. 

my stance is that if you use the word in a amicable way then its fine but its not ok for either race to use it as a derogatory term because of the connotations that goes with that. 

[stconquest]

11 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

my stance is that if you use the word in a amicable way then its fine but its not ok for either race to use it as a derogatory term because of the connotations that goes with that. 

I cringe a little when a black person uses that word when describing an individual of group; no more or less than when a "white" person says it mind you.  There are terms that sometimes better describe the person using them, rather than person the term is directed at. 

[MageTank]

7 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

my stance is that if you use the word in a amicable way then its fine but its not ok for either race to use it as a derogatory term because of the connotations that goes with that. 

I agree with this entirely. Now, I have no desire to use the word in any form, because it's just not a word I identify with or describes my relationship with my friends. That being said, you can't entirely remove the racist undertones of a word if you limit it's use to a specific race. If only black people are allowed to use that word in a friendly tone, then they will always see an outside race as "racist" when they use it, even if they have no ill intentions with the word. 

 

The problem is, people think that by trying to stop racism, you are covering it up. They want to always be loud and remind people of racism, because they think people will forget about the racism of the past. Because of this fear, racism can't die. The people that claim everyone is racist against them, end up being essence of racism's longevity. If people understood that you can move past something, without forgetting about it, then we'd be better off as a species. Sadly, as long as people profit from playing the victim card, or feel better by having a reason to be lazy or unproductive, they will continue to cry foul regardless of whether it is real or not. Any attempt to punish these people will only solidify their claims, and rally others like them. 

[Tieox]

I give it six month before trolling has evolved to a whole new level.

[AresKrieger]

11 minutes ago, Kierax said:

I give it six month before trolling has evolved to a whole new level.

I give it 1.5 since the God Emperor will be sitting atop his throne

 

[SageOfSpice]

"you suck all the fun out of life"

 

Hm.

 

I see nothing wrong, but not everything of it's time.

If we simply dismiss what we do not like, we will never form a complete opinion of what we do like.

The correct answer will always remain to be seen.

Never eat the dip at parties, somebody probably sneezed in it.

[Tieox]

People that get upset about words on the internet are the ones who forgot the age old saying "sticks and stones".

 

Overall if they had their way life would be as fun as dishwater, and people would get sexually aroused when purchasing wallpaper, and painting things in magnolia.

 

 

[Miguel Batista]

For me, freedom of speech is or isn't. For example, in the states, black people don't like to be called niggers (which in Europe is completely irrelevant BTW) yet they call themselves that all the time. That is hypocrisy pure and simple. They also talk about BLM and yet use gold chains and jewellery with conflict diamonds which affects mostly black Africans by fueling some of the most grueling conflicts around. And then they say they worry. Hypocrites.

 

Other examples can be found on the other side too. All those alt righters that go for the data on black people shot by cops and can show that there is no indication of mass police bigotry yet deny data when it suits them like in climate change or Swedish rapes?

Hypocrites!

However, I will say that this PC culture created this problem because you cannot ban words or prevent groups from expressing themselves no matter how much they offend you.

 

These fascists (Anita Sarkesean and her ilk) are having way too much representation and air time. I honestly want them to fuck off and crawl back under the rock they came from. Because if they keep going we risk having the other fascists (alt righters and old school fascists) come into power again with a speech about freedom and justice where in reality is back to invading Poland again (figuratively speaking). I see actual danger here and it starts when free speech is thrown under a bus the moment someone is offended. Lines need to be drawn but calling someone a faggot or a bitch is not it. 

 

If I accused Linus of being a "self serving corrupt manager who is lining his pockets at the expense of his workers", the google bot would let this slide with a 1 out of 100 yet this is much more serious than telling someone to fuck off or calling them a bitch. However, in the middle of all this noise, the seriousness of these sentences have been reversed. One is a personal attack against his integrity and his profession putting his livelihood into question, the other is just random assholery. And I am tired, and I mean really, REALLY tired of seeing SJWs use the first to attack people they disagree with in order to complain about someone being an asshole.

Look at Thunderf00t, they sent letters to his boss calling him a Nazi... Saying he is an Holocaust apologist and that he commands an army of hatred... WTF?

" oh but he offended me!" So what? Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right!

 

I think 4chan's answer to this google bot  problem is ingineous and that there is a difference between being racist and saying racist things. However, this will enable many actual racists to do their thing free of consequences and can empower them which can lead to them actually getting into a position of power. Then what?

 

But at tge same time, wtf is the choice? Bend over and take it? Let them get away with it? They corner people into a corner, label them racists, biggots and nazis for asking questions and expressing ideas that " trigger" certain groups of people, which results in this being the only way they will get heard and get the point across that words are not a problem actions are.

If you get offended by someone contesting your ideas then become leader of North Korea and gtfo!

 

And it starts in the states but it is reaching the UK and Europe. Then what?

We be f'd in the a that's what.

 

For me its simple:

Freedom of speech is.

 

 

[CBojorges]

"Yahoo is run by yahoos". Even ars technical joined the party ?

[FakezZ]

22 hours ago, Centurius said:

Yes, websites are private property. Freedom of speech only covers government retaliation, it does not and should not let people circumvent rules on private property or prevent being called out for shit. 

I never said that they don't have the right to do that. I am just saying whether or not they SHOULD do that. Websites should not ban people for expressing their opinions freely, no matter what they are. Besides, if someone on one site expresses for example racist views and many people on there agree or do not ridicule that opinion, then guess what. The site is probably shit in the first place to attract this kind of people  We should not deny anyone the ability to express whatever opinion they have, instead we should support the good ones and ridicule the "bad". A problem does not go away just by "hiding" it. Believe me my country hid debt for a long time and now look at the result 

[Murasaki]

What a time to live in indeed *slurps tea out of tiny cup*