4 ms·

Fine, so hate speech is speech that "expresses hate and encourages violence". Please explain what "expressing hate" means? --- Replying to your edit: "To your

Fine, so hate speech is speech that "expresses hate and encourages violence". Please explain what "expressing hate" means? --- Replying to your edit: "To your response, "expressing hate" is pretty much self explanatory." Great, so we're still left with "hate speech is speech that expresses hate..." which is completely tautological and useless. Do you not see the problem there? Even if we replace it with "profess a dislike of", it remains useless. Do you consider disliking any group of people based on any characteristic to be hate speech? Do you realize how common this is? Is every single Democrat and Republican now engaged in hate speech? Is everyone on either side of a debate now engaged in hate speech? What do we do now?

joshuamorton 6y ago
No, you continue to ignore the whole immutable characteristics aspect. I get that you don't lie to recognize that part because your whole tautalogical line stops working, but it remains.
- manigandham 6y ago
  So we're back to step 1. Hate speech is only based on immutable characteristics? There's no issue if you target people based on clothes, wealth, sports team, political affiliation, etc? The definition you quoted included religion so was that incorrect?
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    Like I said last time you asked this: I certainly think it's wrong/rude, but I also don't think there's any news to remove such speech, as the negative impact is minimal.
    - manigandham 6y ago
      You didn't answer the question last time either. Is it, or is it not, hate speech? Your quoted definition includes religion. You've contradicted yourself again by saying it's only immutable characteristics. So which is it?
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        You didn't ask if they were hate speech, you asked if they were okay. I answered the question you asked, twice. No they're not hate speech. Personally I could go either way on religion falling under the hate speech/immutable characteristic category. I see good arguments in both directions. To humor you, we'll say that yes, it's immutable and therefore protected, since belief in a higher diety is axiomatic.
        manigandham 6y ago
        Great, then Google is not removing hate speech because 共匪 is not an immutable characteristic. Instead they're censoring US citizens on a US property to appease a foreign authoritarian nation which would never let its own people have such freedom.
        joshuamorton 6y ago
        That's an interesting theory. But I don't think it holds up under deeper analysis. Specifically, there are lots of other phrases, including some that praise the CCP directly that are also removed. Given this additional context, it seems much more likely that the real answer is something like "a bunch of spambots posted messages about communism in Chinese, and as a spam-prevention measure, certain strings were added to a list of auto-removed strings."

joshuamorton 6y ago

No, you continue to ignore the whole immutable characteristics aspect. I get that you don't lie to recognize that part because your whole tautalogical line stops working, but it remains.

manigandham 6y ago
So we're back to step 1. Hate speech is only based on immutable characteristics? There's no issue if you target people based on clothes, wealth, sports team, political affiliation, etc? The definition you quoted included religion so was that incorrect?
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Like I said last time you asked this: I certainly think it's wrong/rude, but I also don't think there's any news to remove such speech, as the negative impact is minimal.
  - manigandham 6y ago
    You didn't answer the question last time either. Is it, or is it not, hate speech? Your quoted definition includes religion. You've contradicted yourself again by saying it's only immutable characteristics. So which is it?
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      You didn't ask if they were hate speech, you asked if they were okay. I answered the question you asked, twice. No they're not hate speech. Personally I could go either way on religion falling under the hate speech/immutable characteristic category. I see good arguments in both directions. To humor you, we'll say that yes, it's immutable and therefore protected, since belief in a higher diety is axiomatic.
      - manigandham 6y ago
        Great, then Google is not removing hate speech because 共匪 is not an immutable characteristic. Instead they're censoring US citizens on a US property to appease a foreign authoritarian nation which would never let its own people have such freedom.
        joshuamorton 6y ago
        That's an interesting theory. But I don't think it holds up under deeper analysis. Specifically, there are lots of other phrases, including some that praise the CCP directly that are also removed. Given this additional context, it seems much more likely that the real answer is something like "a bunch of spambots posted messages about communism in Chinese, and as a spam-prevention measure, certain strings were added to a list of auto-removed strings."