6 ms·

This is a symbol that will be used 10s of millions of times in the next few years. If not much much more. The fact it's even in discussion if it should be the

This is a symbol that will be used 10s of millions of times in the next few years. If not much much more. The fact it's even in discussion if it should be there is a huge free flow of speech rights issue. I'd like to think if you're on hn you see the problems around the fact this was not there years ago. I want a world were people can communicate exactly as they wish. Not by a standard, especially a standard with morals thrown in.

omginternets 11y ago
I don't disagree with the premise that free speech is important, but it's hard to argue that the absence of a middle-finger emoji is preventing people from being nasty to each other on the internet. This changes nothing of consequence (but I personally see no reason not to include it).
- userbinator 11y ago
  Indeed, people were already using _|_ before that. (I vaguely remember a bit of Haskell humour around using that sequence of characters...)
  - chaosfox 11y ago
    probably referring to the bottom type: ⊥ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_type https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_type
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  I suppose the advantage of a middle finger emoji is it can be understood across (some) language barriers, and it's more concise than a roughly equivalent written insult.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
amelius 11y ago
Because before emoticons, there was no free speech? Also, this may be informative: [1] Finally, you may be right that this finger symbol will be used 10s of millions of times in the next few years, but I suspect that often it will end the conversation. Hence the symbol may be considered as part of "speech" but it will certainly not aid "communication". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
- elektromekatron 11y ago
  Communicating that a conversation is now at an end is often a useful feature, rather than a bug.
  - amelius 11y ago
    But using this symbol is ending the conversation in a disrespectful way, thereby nullifying the rest of the communication.
    - yellowapple 11y ago
      Who says that a communication is magically "nullified" if it's ended disrespectfully? My expression of negativity and disrespect is just as valid - if not more so - than trying to conceal it in platitudes like you seem to be implying a preference for.
    - elektromekatron 11y ago
      Communicating disrespect is a useful message in and of itself. If I am telling someone to get lost, I don't want to have to pussyfoot around like some character in an Elizabethan novel. edit - though maybe a Shakespearian play. I wonder if they have an emoji for biting your thumb at someone.
TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
...what? Are you opposed to any text format that does not allow user-defined characters? (Although perhaps you should be if you're a Chinese speaker and have to suffer for applications' poor lack of support for more obscure characters.)
6d6b73 11y ago
Free speech is about what you can say, not how you can say it.
DarkTree 11y ago
This doesn't make sense. Just because a symbol could potentially be in use does not mean that not having it is a violation of free speech. Where is the symbol with a guy standing on a table mooning his boss? Sure, someone could make that, but thinking that the absence of this symbol creates a "huge free flow of speech rights issue" is ludicrous.
profinger 11y ago
This is similar to stupid crap like Swype and Google's version of it both not inserting curse words when I gesture type them. It's not their business to butt into mine. If I want to gesture type a curse word I should be able to. I understand the issue of possible mistypes being a problem but that's why you turn them off by default and give someone a simple solution to turn them back on.
- eric_h 11y ago
  I'm reminded of a joke that's been repeated many times on twitter. "Dear [Apple|Google|etc.], I never, ever intend to type the word 'duck'"
rndn 11y ago
Each rule we follow blindly is a stupid one. If the introduction of a new sign just promotes hate and brings no advantages, then there is no value gained.

omginternets 11y ago

I don't disagree with the premise that free speech is important, but it's hard to argue that the absence of a middle-finger emoji is preventing people from being nasty to each other on the internet. This changes nothing of consequence (but I personally see no reason not to include it).

userbinator 11y ago
Indeed, people were already using _|_ before that. (I vaguely remember a bit of Haskell humour around using that sequence of characters...)
- chaosfox 11y ago
  probably referring to the bottom type: ⊥ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_type https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_type
TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
I suppose the advantage of a middle finger emoji is it can be understood across (some) language barriers, and it's more concise than a roughly equivalent written insult.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

amelius 11y ago

Because before emoticons, there was no free speech? Also, this may be informative: [1] Finally, you may be right that this finger symbol will be used 10s of millions of times in the next few years, but I suspect that often it will end the conversation. Hence the symbol may be considered as part of "speech" but it will certainly not aid "communication". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...

elektromekatron 11y ago
Communicating that a conversation is now at an end is often a useful feature, rather than a bug.
- amelius 11y ago
  But using this symbol is ending the conversation in a disrespectful way, thereby nullifying the rest of the communication.
  - yellowapple 11y ago
    Who says that a communication is magically "nullified" if it's ended disrespectfully? My expression of negativity and disrespect is just as valid - if not more so - than trying to conceal it in platitudes like you seem to be implying a preference for.
  - elektromekatron 11y ago
    Communicating disrespect is a useful message in and of itself. If I am telling someone to get lost, I don't want to have to pussyfoot around like some character in an Elizabethan novel. edit - though maybe a Shakespearian play. I wonder if they have an emoji for biting your thumb at someone.

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago

...what? Are you opposed to any text format that does not allow user-defined characters? (Although perhaps you should be if you're a Chinese speaker and have to suffer for applications' poor lack of support for more obscure characters.)

6d6b73 11y ago

Free speech is about what you can say, not how you can say it.

DarkTree 11y ago

This doesn't make sense. Just because a symbol could potentially be in use does not mean that not having it is a violation of free speech. Where is the symbol with a guy standing on a table mooning his boss? Sure, someone could make that, but thinking that the absence of this symbol creates a "huge free flow of speech rights issue" is ludicrous.

profinger 11y ago

This is similar to stupid crap like Swype and Google's version of it both not inserting curse words when I gesture type them. It's not their business to butt into mine. If I want to gesture type a curse word I should be able to. I understand the issue of possible mistypes being a problem but that's why you turn them off by default and give someone a simple solution to turn them back on.

eric_h 11y ago
I'm reminded of a joke that's been repeated many times on twitter. "Dear [Apple|Google|etc.], I never, ever intend to type the word 'duck'"

rndn 11y ago

Each rule we follow blindly is a stupid one. If the introduction of a new sign just promotes hate and brings no advantages, then there is no value gained.