Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#21

Post by dvdhsu »

nestlequ1k wrote: post #14
tikhonj wrote: post #12

I really doubt Google would do this, not just because of potential contracts or even the lost revenue but mainly because of how tentative their market share is. The only thing locking most people into Google search is habit . If Google were to not work for a day, a ton of people would start using Bing and friends; a significant proportion of these would indubitably continue using them forever. Most people don't reall…

I totally agree. Blacking out is just stupid. Raising awareness via splash page or messaging is effective and important. Please, let's not be retarded. If things black out one day, it'll just piss people off and the next day it'll be back to normal. Let's encourage Google / Facebook / Twitter to use their huge audiences to spread awareness of the issue. When the public hears what SOPA is, they will reject it. The onl…

Please don't toss the word "retarded" around. Retards can't help being retarded. Using it as a synonym for "stupid" is crass.

It's no different from saying "SOPA is gay!!!"

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#23

Post by Shenglong »

dvdhsu wrote: post #21
nestlequ1k wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree. Blacking out is just stupid. Raising awareness via splash page or messaging is effective and important. Please, let's not be retarded. If things black out one day, it'll just piss people off and the next day it'll be back to normal. Let's encourage Google / Facebook / Twitter to use their huge audiences to spread awareness of the issue. When the public hears what SOPA is, they will reject it. The onl…

Please don't toss the word "retarded" around. Retards can't help being retarded. Using it as a synonym for "stupid" is crass. It's no different from saying "SOPA is gay!!!"

Adjective: Less advanced, esp. mentally, than is usual for one's age. Synonyms: backward - delayed

Seems fine to me, especially considering it's no longer socially acceptable to use the word to describe the mentally disabled. Using gay however, is a completely different scenario. Retarded reflects on mental performance, while gay reflects on sexuality.

English already has so few words - we might as well use the ones we have.

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#24

Post by andrewflnr »

Natsu wrote: post #8

I doubt they'll really black it out. However, I could see them doing a doodle or something like that. Or maybe they could have something that draws black censor bars all over random words in your results that fade away after a few seconds and put up a link explaining what's wrong? That would be relatively easy, especially for Google.

I like your idea of blacking out random words. I don't think just a doodle is enough though. They do enough of those all the time that I usually just tune them out.

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#25

Post by [deleted] »

Natsu wrote: post #8

I doubt they'll really black it out. However, I could see them doing a doodle or something like that. Or maybe they could have something that draws black censor bars all over random words in your results that fade away after a few seconds and put up a link explaining what's wrong? That would be relatively easy, especially for Google.

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#26

Post by pbreit »

I don't think Google would do a complete or even extensive blackout but I don't think SLAs would be the deciding factor (if Google has (m)any). I suspect if there was semi-consensus internally for Google to do something, it would figure out a clever way to participate.

This is why something like HackerNews deciding to participate matters. Not because of the HN audience but because of the momentum needed to get the bigger guys to go along.

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#27

Post by Natsu »

andrewflnr wrote: post #24
Natsu wrote: post #8

I doubt they'll really black it out. However, I could see them doing a doodle or something like that. Or maybe they could have something that draws black censor bars all over random words in your results that fade away after a few seconds and put up a link explaining what's wrong? That would be relatively easy, especially for Google.

I like your idea of blacking out random words. I don't think just a doodle is enough though. They do enough of those all the time that I usually just tune them out.

I haven't done any JavaScript for a while now. I should see if there's a sensible way to hack something like that up. Maybe via lettering.js?

EDIT: Apparently Tumblr did something like this. That must be where I heard about the idea.

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#28

Post by dvdhsu »

Shenglong wrote: post #23
dvdhsu wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't toss the word "retarded" around. Retards can't help being retarded. Using it as a synonym for "stupid" is crass. It's no different from saying "SOPA is gay!!!"

Adjective: Less advanced, esp. mentally, than is usual for one's age. Synonyms: backward - delayed Seems fine to me, especially considering it's no longer socially acceptable to use the word to describe the mentally disabled. Using gay however, is a completely different scenario. Retarded reflects on mental performance, while gay reflects on sexuality. English already has so few words - we might as well use the ones…

> Adjective: Less advanced, esp. mentally, than is usual for one's age. Synonyms: backward - delayed

The OP doesn't use it to mean "backwards" , "delayed" or "less advanced". He means "stupid" and should just say so.

> it's no longer socially acceptable to use the word to describe the mentally disabled

Looking on Wordnik [1], four dictionaries out of five list "retard" as having to do with mental retardation (Wordnet 3.0 actually doesn't mention it according to Wordnik, but a quick search reveals that it actually does [2]).

Wikipedia [3], in fact, argues that "mental retardation" is on a "euphemistic treadmill" [4]. I'll allow Wikipedia to take it away:

The terms mental retardation and mentally retarded were invented in the middle of the 20th century to replace the previous set of terms, which were deemed to have become offensive. By the end of the 20th century, these terms themselves have come to be widely seen as disparaging and politically incorrect and in need of replacement.

The term "mentally retarded" is no longer "socially acceptable", precisely because it perceived to be "disparaging".

> Using gay however, is a completely different scenario. Retarded reflects on mental performance, while gay reflects on sexuality.

People who are mentally disabled are unable to change it. As far as I know, the same applies to one's sexual orientation.

The OP uses the word "retarded" by saying "let's not be retarded". My state of retardation doesn't change from second to second; it's fixed at birth. Insulting what one can't change is the most powerful type of insult. If you call me "stupid", I can always work to be less ignorant. If you call me a "chink" because I'm Chinese, I can't change that, and I feel more insulted.

> English already has so few words - we might as well use the ones we have.

That's a horrible reason. Simply using the word "idiotic", "dense", or any other works just fine in the OP's sentence. None of those refer to immutable characteristics such as "gay", "retard", or "chink".

When communicating, there isn't any reason to use a potentially offensive word, especially when there are a plethora of less insulting ones available.

Edit: Changed "sexual preferences" to "sexual orientation". Thanks emmapersky!

-------------------------------------------

1. http://www.wordnik.com/words/retard

2. http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=retarded&su...

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_retardation#cite_note-is...

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism_treadmill#Euphemism_t...

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#29

Post by emmapersky »

dvdhsu wrote: post #28
Shenglong wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adjective: Less advanced, esp. mentally, than is usual for one's age. Synonyms: backward - delayed Seems fine to me, especially considering it's no longer socially acceptable to use the word to describe the mentally disabled. Using gay however, is a completely different scenario. Retarded reflects on mental performance, while gay reflects on sexuality. English already has so few words - we might as well use the ones…

> Adjective: Less advanced, esp. mentally, than is usual for one's age. Synonyms: backward - delayed The OP doesn't use it to mean "backwards" , "delayed" or "less advanced". He means "stupid" and should just say so. > it's no longer socially acceptable to use the word to describe the mentally disabled Looking on Wordnik [1], four dictionaries out of five list "retard" as having to do with mental retardation (Wordnet…

> People who are mentally disabled are unable to change it. As far as I know, the same applies to one's sexual preferences.

Sorry, but I just had to point out the "Sexual Preference" implies choice, which, as you correctly point out is not something people choose. I think the phrase you were searching for was "Sexual Orientation"

Re: Ask HN: Legality of a Jan 18 SOPA blackout on Google?

#30

Post by wimpycofounder »

dvdhsu wrote: post #28
Shenglong wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adjective: Less advanced, esp. mentally, than is usual for one's age. Synonyms: backward - delayed Seems fine to me, especially considering it's no longer socially acceptable to use the word to describe the mentally disabled. Using gay however, is a completely different scenario. Retarded reflects on mental performance, while gay reflects on sexuality. English already has so few words - we might as well use the ones…

> Adjective: Less advanced, esp. mentally, than is usual for one's age. Synonyms: backward - delayed The OP doesn't use it to mean "backwards" , "delayed" or "less advanced". He means "stupid" and should just say so. > it's no longer socially acceptable to use the word to describe the mentally disabled Looking on Wordnik [1], four dictionaries out of five list "retard" as having to do with mental retardation (Wordnet…

I'm leery of people who have the time to write up walls of text like this.
Post reply on HN