Google and ProPublica team up to build a national hate crime database
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
There has been a serious effort to label everyone that disagrees with Israel's growing apartheid policies toward the Palestinian people as antisemitic hate criminals. I worry that this sort of corporate vigilanteism is going to make it effectively illegal to disagree with the narratives sponsored by the wealthiest members of our society.
I'm totally totally appalled..by Saturday's events..and part of me rejoices at Cloudflare/Google/Godaddy fighting Nazi's... but a part of me - the techy/privacy part is screaming MY GOD WHAT Are we Letting them do in the name of 'Anti-Hate' -- giving everyone a label, or making them fit in a box is a scary precipice to go over.
I hope and pray we can find better ways to combat the hate, I think the leaders at google are well meaning in this, but this screams to me that something bigger and deadlier could be unleashed as a result. We need to be REALLY careful how we start self-policing the internet.
Everyone dislikes certain individuals, or groups of people. Sometimes it's for petty, wrongheaded reasons. Sometimes it's for well-thought out, valid reasons. Sometimes it's ideological, sometimes it's pragmatic. Sometimes it changes over time, sometimes it doesn't.
I don't understand the emotional / viewpoint policing people seem to want to engage in lately.
How are 14 million jews a threat to millions of white people? It baffles my brain their logic or lack thereof...
so the answer is NO you can't HATE when your words of HATE include words about killing, and committing acts of Genocide and LOTS of white supremacists talk of genocide. Because we just ignore it--and well, remember how that worked out for Germany.. but but it can't happen in America right? Ask that of the Germans who were alive in 1920 if they could foresee 1941..
And lo and behold, the workers part will become irrelevant.
And non party member people will start to have a lower life expectancy after this Party gaining power.
And it's not okay. Rationally there are limits on speech. And yes, it's borderline impossible to foresee what should have been allowed yet got banned, but it's still a better (more rational) option than letting very short sighted (so ignorant racists) gain power.
Sure, maybe censorship will have a Streisand effect, maybe there needa to be an "index" of banned content with a maximally precise explanation and refutation of it.
> Ask that of the Germans who were alive in 1920 if they could foresee 1941..
Too bad germany had censorship.
Atheists hate on christians. Christians hate on atheists. Democrats hate on trump and republicans and vice versa. There are blacks who hate on whites. Whites who hate on asians. Asians who hate on whomever they hate.
Being able to hate and love is an essential part of being a free human being.
> but but it can't happen in America right?
Dozens of native tribes were wiped out worse than jews in ww2. Many native peoples were completely wipe out.
It's not about what can or can't happen in america. It's about freedom and individual rights.
> Ask that of the Germans who were alive in 1920 if they could foresee 1941..
Yeah... A significant portion of germans were attacked/marginalized/silenced. Millions of germans became disillusioned. That's how you get Nazi Germany.
Silencing and marginalizing americans and taking away our freedoms is a recipe for disaster.
Not only is that going to make these people more extreme and more angry, it's going to attract millions of moderate americans who don't want nothing to do with extremism.
I could expand but I think this gets the gist of my fears out there.
> This page lists media reports, collected by Google News, about hate crimes and bias incidents.
this is all part of the big agenda
This project is just a list of news reports talking about hate crime.
Take a look at the actual project: https://projects.propublica.org/hate-news-index/
Also, they're inevitably going to make mistakes. How are they going to compensate the victims?
This is one of those hard things, because I don't fear what it currently is, or what the intentions are, but I do fear what it can become. Definitions of things change over time, and what is considered a "hate crime" can and will change. This could easily become a tool for the enforcement of political correctness (and I don't mean that the way the alt-right likes to define it. I mean the traditional definition, that being politically correct means you agree with those in power).
And what of somebody falsely accused or convicted? We know the police can be crooked and that courts can make mistakes. Are we to ruin someone's life and/or reputation because of that? Must they beg and sacrifice at the altar of Google to clear their name?
> This page lists media reports, collected by Google News, about hate crimes and bias incidents.
> “In this case, it helps reporters by digging out locations, names and other useful data from the 3,000-plus news reports
He doesn't like the idea of this list being made. Is that not enough?
> ProPublica was the brainchild of billionaires and major Democratic donors Herbert and Marion Sandler, the former chief executives of the Golden West Financial Corporation, who have committed $10 million a year to the project
I am cautiously optimistic that they might be able to accomplish something good here and create a more data-driven analysis of something that's a hot-button, highly emotionally charged topic right now.
All these liberal groups are waking up dark and powerful forces that have been dormant. They are delusional thinking it's something they will be able to control. Same applies with republicans feeding the Tea Party and all that. When anger rises it doesn't stop until there's a lot of blood.
Can you point to the known conservative group in that mix?
1) https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2017/08/19/propublica-working-...
I will repeat it for the umpteenth time: George Soros is funding Antifa, BLM, neo-Nazis, the refugee crisis in EU, and is a known Nazi collaborator who has been declared a threat by his country Hungary and Israel. He is not an idol.
Jesus Christ. 13 hours and this conspiracy drivel is still there in full black. I guess HN's really jumped the shark.
Full list of partners here:
> This page lists media reports, collected by Google News, about hate crimes and bias incidents.
finding false positives means eventually you have to decide what you consider a hate crime
> (casual uses of the word “hate” for example)
The novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell is an American classic which explores the human mind when it comes to power, corruption, control, and the ultimate utopian society. Orwell indirectly proposes that power given to the government will ultimately become corrupt and they will attempt to force all to conform to their one set standard. He also sets forth the idea that the corrupted government will attempt to destroy any and all mental and physical opposition to their beliefs, thus eliminating any opportunity for achieving an utopian society.
I guess Mr Orwell got it wrong, it won't be the government. Google has already shown it's belief in "Diversity", but only how they define it, as experienced by the engineer they just booted.
Google, FaceBook, Apple, Twitter, and Microsoft will be controlling all the information. Don't be surprised if you see only what they want you to see.
People worry about the NSA invading your private life, the NSA drools about the data these Techno Giants already have. And of course they put on this glorified act of denial when the government requests information.
Yet people worry about who will police what these government entities are doing, so who is going to police these Techno Giants? Remember, these companies are in for the money and all that that comes with it.
Zuckerberg wants everyone to have a Basic Income, who is going to pay for that? But it is one way to buy votes. It sounds like just another welfare program.
Welfare is destroying this country, as it is today. It destroys incentive and when that happens, the mind becomes worthless.
I tend to go along with Thomas Sowell. https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2013/07/03/thomas-sowe...
https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/instead-of-...
The ideology of the Techno Giants, "Your Life Belongs to US"
> The novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell is an American classic
Edit: To clarify, I understand that you were referencing their hate crimes database and that I brought up their list of people they label as extremists, and while the two things aren't the same, my point was to highlight that not everyone sees the SPLC as infallible.
Ref.: http://stevepieczenik.com/charlottesville-staged-confrontati...
What crazy kooky outside-the-box reporting that is, which means it must be true I guess.
#6 105 points/1h YouTube admits 'wrong call' over deletion of Syrian war crime videos
Yeah, perfectly explainable. Like every other time.
Personally, I'm not a fan of that (feels a bit /. under DICE for my liking) - but I'm just a freeloader here, like the rest of us.
2 of these things are not like the others. 2 of these things just don't belong.
edit: yay downvotes from people who can't mention nazis without whataboutism.
Google's algorithms never fail. Never.
In Berkeley, they beat several people unconscious, and that was just over a speaker who they didn't like.
That's crossing some serious lines, whether you find it justifiable or not.
Well, which one was it? That's a massive difference in identity.
These don't seem to be very easy to find. Can you link some examples? (Honestly asking).
HN readers, sure Google is on your side today but that might not be the case tomorrow. Any sane person can see why this is an awful idea.
However, I wonder if this promotes hate towards the haters (probably a dumb thought)..? Who gets to decide who the bad guys are and what a hate crime is..?
I wonder what would the EFF would say about this.
We've been on this road before. Under the pretense of terrorism threats individual rights were eroded on a massive scale. And Google was part of it, either actively or with willful ignorance (e.g. not encrypting internal links so NSA could easily tap).
Who are they to decide what is a hate crime? In Canada it's a hate crime to refuse to use on of a dozen gender pronouns for "non-binary" people.
The more I think about it though, the more it seems wrong.
There must be local laws that regulate hate crimes, it seems wrong that a corporation gets with someone and starts shaming people online instead of letting local authorities deal with it.
And, if local authorities don't deal with it it's either legal—and so they should be able to do whatever they want no matter how stupid it is—or the problem is with the police, but a database doesn't solve that.
No it's not. Listen to a lawyer or actual expert instead of a psych professor with a chip on his shoulder.
> With very few exceptions, grounds of discrimination are not defined in legislation but are left to courts, tribunals, and commissions to interpret and explain, based on their detailed experience with particular cases.
Yeah, vague wording would surely work out if it's a hate crime or not. This is ridiculous. Laws should be clear. The majority of Canadian judges are quite left-liberals.
Good.
It's just a self-righteous rallying cry for more divisiveness.