Genuine question...why not just type "crap"? It's not even that much of a curse, but I've never really understood the point of self-censorship. If you don't want to curse then you could just use a non-curse word.
Even now I wonder if I am allowed to type bitch here...
I guess we will find out.
I grew up texting. But in the 90s any profanity filters could just be turned off in settings.
Youtube is a lot more guilty of it though, as well as demonetizing.
YouTube has its problems but I don't think it's had quite as strong of an effect on language.
I've never had texts censored by texting providers, they're not supposed to read texts in the first place (at least around here).
Leaves more to the imagination.
To have an unclosed asterisk replacing characters in a word? I've only ever seen that as a way to bypass censorship. This spans communications from people currently in their 40s down to 20.
(although it is a half-joke since it's definitely not a curse word imo)
I'll admit, it never once occurred to me that people might be using censored characters to provide more emphasis that a word is a swear, but I guess it does indeed do that, at least to the writer. Whether that comes across to the reader, and whether the writer cares that their intention was understood... I'm not so sure.
Findes der en Haddock/Egon Olsen tiradegenerator derude?
See YouTube.
It’s one thing if it’s some funny commentary channel avoiding those words, but what bothers me is the true crime YouTubers. In the subject of true crime, rape and murder are just things that are probably going to come up, and when they refuse to use the appropriate language, it comes off as infantilizing, which is weird considering that my actual YouTube account is over 18, let alone the viewer using it.
Advertisers ruin everything, I guess.
Basically someone comes up with something which is nonsensical, but plausible. Like believing that their videos are unpopular because they said the word "rape" and the algorithm magically got them, rather than because their videos suck. Then someone else sees that and starts thinking it is true. It silently spreads across the population.
I've seen this in organisations, where new recruits haven't been properly trained. Someone has come up with a method which is wildly incorrect and illegal, but plausible. The other new people around them have copied them. They've become slightly more experienced people, they've taught the next round of new people.
Before you know it, half of the organisation is doing something hilariously wrong, and they all sincerely believe it is the right way of doing it, because everyone does it. It's just self-reinforcing at that point.
In psychology that kind of thing is referred to as "superstition".
More specifically, "superstition" in this sense refers to the phenomenon of copying someone else's successful approach to a problem you have. (In your example, getting views on youtube.) Since you don't know what parts of their approach matter, you copy the effective parts and the ineffective parts equally.
YouTube used to demonetise profanity unless it was mild. YouTube would demonetise profanity in the first X number of seconds of the video. These rules change and have been relaxed of April last year, but generally these rules still exist.
There isn't a hard filter if you say "suicide" you automatically get it. However it increases the likely hood of demonetisation. So people avoid it to be safe. So you end up with people using stupid euphemisms all the time.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en#Harm...
Creators are being careful don't want their video demonetised because once it gets the yellow flag, even if it is removed later they've lost the majority of monetisation.
The problem with providing direct proof of this is that YouTube moves the goalposts quite often and their auto moderation system is very inconsistent.
That can be quite confusing. You had German mustache-man, Russian mustache-man, French mustache-man (Petain), French small-mustache-man (de Gaulle), Spanish small-moustache-man (Franco)
I do find it a little amusing, because commenters stopped criticizing my cursing the moment I started getting a good chunk of karma here. I remember in 2016 someone criticized me for using the term "shitposting"...I don't think I've gotten that kind of criticism since 2016 though.
Not saying you're wrong, but my career got a lot less frustrating when I started focusing more on the product and less on the ergonomics of the implementation. If you need to build a house and the customer isn't willing to pay for brick, you use vinyl siding.
I recently started learning CUDA and parallel programming paradigms.
1) code gets split between a host part that goes through your normal compiler, and a device part that goes through the GPU compiler. You may as well write the kernels separate and compile them via a separate compilation step, and keep your trusted host compiler for the host-side code.
2) data needs to move between the host and devices via explicit buffer transfers and synchronization steps, CUDA tries to hide this with annotated pointers, but it is really easier to think about those as just buffers that you allocate and transfer IMO, instead of trying to transparently share pointers between host and device like CUDA does.
3) kernel launches can we wrapped in a function similar to:
void RunKernel(const char *kernel_name, size_t width, size_t height, size_t depth);
Instead of the funky <<< >>> syntax that CUDA for C/C++ imposes. The problem is that once you start putting that in your code, it stops being C++ and stops being portable to non-CUDA GPUs. The launching and grid settings can be a bit hard to grasp at first, but sugarcoating that in bastardized C++ syntax does not absolve from having to understand it eventually.
So a good place to start might be an OpenCL or Metal primer, depending on the hardware you have available. D3D12 (and probably Vulcan too) makes this much harder than it should be, with too much boilerplate but is overall a mature and well-designed API should you wish to develop for Windows. Starting with WebGPU might also be good these days. It has a very different shader language than the others, but the rest of the concepts are similar, and it has a strong emphasis on making things async, which is what you want for performance anyways.
Claude/Codex should be able to get you moving very quickly.
Some platforms disallow certain words. In order to bypass that, some people use the asterisks. That's just as one possible answer to your question; there can be many different reasons for self-censorship, but to me the most logical one is when one tries to work around crappy restrictions, such as on terrible reddit (they killed old.reddit recently; I retired before that due to moderators being insane, but I also said that if old.reddit is gone, I am gone anyway - the requirement to now log in, totally defeats old.reddit com's usecase. Then again reddit went downhill many years before that already, so not a real loss.)
(if a platform is serious about Bad Words for whatever reason (moral?) they would also forbid character replacements; ultimately it's the intent, not the word itself, that they try to steer with rules like that)
I guess I never understood censorship when it’s plainly obvious what you’re censoring. Anyone who can read will clearly know that it said “crap”, so I don’t see how it’s fundamentally different than just saying the word. You still put the word into my brain.
Otherwise cr*p is just as good as crap, shit, horseshit, poopoo or such.
edit: * replaced with \* as HN interprets asterisks as formatting for emphasis. Thx latexr for informing me
alternately, perhaps he meant to match all of cp, crp, crrp, crrrp, and so on. the dude might really like regexes.
/s
I believe we'll be left to wonder.