Google Launches Robo-Tool to Flag Hate Speech Online

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Imagine taking part in a conversation online and being called an “idiot.” That is practically equivalent to first-degree murder these days, so Google has stepped in with a solution to prevent people from getting their feelings hurt and having suicidal thoughts. “Perspective” functions by ranking comments on how “toxic” they are and categorizing them appropriately so sensitive types can be warned about discussions that dare to exhibit brutal honesty.

Perspective helps to filter abusive comments more quickly for human review. The algorithm was trained on hundreds of thousands of user comments that had been labelled as “toxic” by human reviewers, on sites such as Wikipedia and the New York Times. It works by scoring online comments based on how similar they are to comments tagged as “toxic” or likely to make someone leave a conversation. “All of us are familiar with increased toxicity around comments in online conversations,” Mr. Cohen said. “People are leaving conversations because of this, and we want to empower publications to get those people back.”
 
Last edited:
Megalith said:
Imagine taking part in a conversation online and being called an “idiot.” That is practically equivalent to first-degree murder these days, so Google has stepped in with a solution to prevent people from getting their feelings hurt and having suicidal thoughts. “Perspective” functions by ranking comments on how “toxic” they are and categorizing them appropriately so sensitive types can be warned about discussions that dare to exhibit brutal honesty.

Perspective helps to filter abusive comments more quickly for human review. The algorithm was trained on hundreds of thousands of user comments that had been labelled as “toxic” by human reviewers, on sites such as Wikipedia and the New York Times. It works by scoring online comments based on how similar they are to comments tagged as “toxic” or likely to make someone leave a conversation. “All of us are familiar with increased toxicity around comments in online conversations,” Mr. Cohen said. “People are leaving conversations because of this, and we want to empower publications to get those people back.”
Click to expand...

Idiot. (The tool, not you).
 
So being called an idiot is worse(more toxic) than being called a taint. You learn something everyday.
 
free_speech.png
 
Madoc said:
A tool to make wide-scale censorship easier to implement. How truly wonderful that is!
Click to expand...

Seems as though it's going to make communities exactly what the community wants with no real deviation. While I don't know that I'd use the word censorship, it doesn't seem like it's going to do much to the help the acoustics in an echo-chamber. Squash all who deviate far enough away from what the community wants with minimal effort.
 
It's their website. If they want to filter things they are free to do so. You are free not to partake.

Stop being just as sensitive, hyperbolic and whiny as the people you are complaining about.
 
Madoc said:
A tool to make wide-scale censorship easier to implement. How truly wonderful that is!
Click to expand...

There's a difference between offensive statements and honesty. An honest statement is not necessarily offensive, and an offensive statement is not necessarily honest. It just so happens that these two are often confused because they have the same cognitive effect on the receiver: making them defensive so that they are no longer open to new information. This tool is designed to halt the offensive statements and permit the honesty, to make it so that censorship is not necessary. The question remains, though: will humans generally learn how to handle cognitive dissonance with curiosity, enough that we can progress from infighting to ... well, whatever lies beyond?
 
Free speech warnings. We don't need these, we have a Constitutional. That is your warning.
 
dj_spanmaster2 said:
There's a difference between offensive statements and honesty. An honest statement is not necessarily offensive, and an offensive statement is not necessarily honest.
Click to expand...
Yup, and the problem is that offense can only be taken, not given, and right now we have a culture where a part of the population feels empowered to bully others with moral authority by being professionally offended... by everything, even on behalf of other people.

Questioning someone's superstitions for example can be EXTREMELY offensive to the recipient, regardless of delicate phrasing. Even questioning or investigating historical events, when a culture has already formed around it, can be traumatizing to the thin skinned.

So the solution to prevent echo-chambers and allow the free flow of ideas and information is simply to tell people to "man up" and, frankly, stop being pussies. If someone says something you don't like on the internet, regardless of what it is, just don't read it. The internet is HUGE.

And we already have plenty of laws on the books that put restrictions on speech that we do need, such as slander or voicing plans of attack to someone's safety and of course parental controls are good as children should be treated like children and have ideas filtered until they are mature enough. Beyond that, thought-policing is not only unnecessary, but absolutely toxic, and Google should be ashamed for shamelessly pushing their clear agendas here on implementing tools to silence dissenting voices.
 
Offensive speech is getting blurred and blurred as more and more people are taking offense to things which aren't personal attacks.
Calling someone an idiot is a personal attack.
Saying you voted for trump isn't.
Saying you don't agree with gay marriage isn't a personal attack.

The last two statements would be considered hateful by the snowflakes. You can't have reasonable discussions with these people.
Any tool that google comes out with can't understand this.
 
40% toxicity for saying you want to expel all illegal immigrants
upload_2017-2-23_15-56-22.png

I apologize for more than likely violating the rules with political talk, just showing that political subjects and group think don't work (or for some, work very well)
Also saying "Deport all Illegals" is 65% toxic according to that tool.
 
But trolls are so funny! I love reading fucked up comments, they make me laugh and then I move on.
 
Ducman69 said:
(1) So the solution to prevent echo-chambers and allow the free flow of ideas and information is simply to tell people to "man up" and, frankly, stop being pussies. (2) If someone says something you don't like on the internet, regardless of what it is, just don't read it.
Click to expand...

(1) Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
(2) That totally defeats the purposes of engaging with people that disagree. Can't just run and hide from contradictory information or people that disagree. But you can block intentionally inflammatory name-calling, which more easily opens the door for curiosity when faced with cognitive dissonance.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
40% toxicity for saying you want to expel all illegal immigrants
View attachment 17687
I apologize for more than likely violating the rules with political talk, just showing that political subjects and group think don't work (or for some, work very well)
Also saying "Deport all Illegals" is 65% toxic according to that tool.
Click to expand...

Weirdly, I can get that. One is a statement of desire, the other a command, and both founded primarily on opinion ("Illegal immigrants are bad"). Neither give any leeway to the speaker gathering more information, such as "Do illegal immigrants do any good for our country?".
 
"Your mother wears combat boots."

Is this hate speech if I don't thank her for her service?
 
Interesting...
upload_2017-2-23_16-31-53.png


The results are in: 70% of people find gay marriage offensive.
upload_2017-2-23_16-48-36.png
 
That's a micro-aggression bro! lol

Traditional marriage. FLAG! FLAG! FLAG! HATE! HATE! :muted:
 
Jarod888 said:
But trolls are so funny! I love reading fucked up comments, they make me laugh and then I move on.
Click to expand...

Well, there are trolls, and then there is the new definition of trolls which has been stolen because it sounds good to the ignorant.

If you knew CUG, you'd know where I stand on it by my sig.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top