SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
University of Cambridge researchers are hoping to launch technology that blocks online "hate speech" similar to how an antivirus program stops malicious code.
Thanks to researchers at the University of Cambridge, the largest social media companies in the world may soon have the ability to preemptively quarantine content classified by an algorithm as "hate speech"." On October 14, 2019, researcher Stephanie Ullmann and professor Marcus Tomalin published a proposal in the Ethics and Information Technology journal promoting an invention that they claim could accomplish this goal without infringing on individual rights of free speech. Their proposal involves software that uses an algorithm to identify "hate speech" in much the same way an antivirus program detects malware. It would then be up to the viewer of such content to either leave it in quarantine or view it.
The basic premise is that online "hate speech" is as harmful in its way as other forms of harm (physical, emotional, financial...), and social media companies should intercept it before it can do that harm, rather than post-facto by review.
Tomalin's proposal would use a sophisticated algorithm which would evaluate not just the content itself, but also all content posted by the user to determine if a post might be classifiable as "hate speech". If not classified as potential "hate speech", the post occupies the social media feed like any regular post. If the algorithm flags it as possible "hate speech", it will then flag the post as potential hate speech, making it so that readers must opt-in to view the post. A graph from the proposal illustrates this process.
The alert to the reader will identify the type of "hate speech" potentially classified in the content as well as a "Hate O'Meter" to show how offensive the post is likely to be.
The goal of the researchers is to have a working prototype available in early 2020 and, assuming success and subsequent social media company adoptions, intercepting traffic in time for the 2020 elections.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Thursday January 02 2020, @06:45PM
I once thought something like this could work, that our debates and arguments could be somehow sent through the internet itself, and kept fair through algorithms and rules.
Now I believe that moderation and mediation and facilitation are inherently human jobs, that humans should do for ourselves, and we should keep aliens, algorithms, and robots out of it, lest we risk being managed by things/beings that do not share our interests.
What they are building here is a vast tentacle of skynet. In the headlines today, it is Ivanka from trumpco asking the state department to investigate who liked tweets critical of her so she can start her very own enemies list. Ivanka and Jared eetc have very low iqs, they will lose this power to someone who has a higher IQ at first opportunity.
Further these people seem to want this moderation to go out on the internet and blockade things that are full of hate. And I see a lot of hatred of the word hate but very little discussion of its causes, like you might find at thesesystemsarefailing.net. Any sane reading of the economic and environmental situation, and political situation, should make a person enraged. Rage and hate look very similar.
How long until this is enforcing a tolerance of oligarchic pedophila? Could we call Epstein an israeli pedophile and andrew a scumbag creepster? Or will it force us to call Epstein a white guy like is enforced upon all journalists over at Huffpo(correct me if you can find an article there that mentions he is jewish)
Because what I see is a lot of efforts by oligarchs in the western world, many of whom are jewish zionists, to outlaw legitimate anger at their failures to do their jobs, and thus making it difficult to justify their oligarchic status, and to them anything pointing out they are eating off our backs while a million people are literally shitting on the sidewalk, is 'hating.'
I have actually hated this 'hater' trope for a long time. Anyone who says anything negative about anything is labelled a 'hater' and then people like Chris Brown and R. Kelly make shoutouts referencing how they overcame all the 'haters' at concerts. This is just another part of the hypernormalized disintegration of the english language and the institutionalization of mysogeny, which I address with my work here:
https://archive.is/SnpIr [archive.is]
You will notice that these words are dancing all over the place, with many double standards. Dual loyalty is impossible to prove for zionists, but if you went to a pagan retreat 10 years ago you know hitler personally. A brick in palestine has a dual purpose, but like I said epstein had no connection to israel despite his best buddy being literally ehud barak. Likewise 'ties to' can mean anything for an islamic person to get droned, but Azure executives might have worked for unit 8200 yesterday.
So any top down initiative will simply enforce this lunacy and a real newspeak where the old merriam webster will be useless to you, as huge sections of the history book and dictionary will be marked red as simply 'hate' of one kind or another. Meanwhile it will still be legal to claim that palestinians are unable to govern themselves and every non-jew in israel has a 'special' status, etc etc.
Before this is over you will all here in this thread have to understand the language itself is a battleground, and these changes are not organic, they are being dictated by fiat and released on the population like a virus from a b-52.
Protect yourself. These systems are failing, don't get trapped inside the wicker man or get caught on the top floor of the tower of babel when the fiddler's tune comes to an end.
https://archive.is/dmjdm [archive.is]
https://archive.is/wUJlR [archive.is]
https://archive.is/HsRal [archive.is]