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

X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

blog.emojipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 322 posts

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#271

Post by philistine »

ploxiln wrote: post #209
qsort wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I believe including emoji in unicode was a blunder. A capital "A" is the same in any font; I can write a message in monospace and my interlocutor can read it in sans-serif, or tap in morse code and have it rendered in hand- writing, in all cases the difference is immaterial. On the other hand we don't use pictures in the same way, the meaning of the message depends on the exact picture used as part of the…

Even more, fonts having multiple colors in a glyph was a huge complexity explosion for font rendering, for terminals, and more. You can see a very quick technical summary of different ways of encoding colors in fonts here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenType#Color_fonts But anyway, images should have remained separate things, png or whatever. Fonts rendering is complex enough with complex scripts e.g. Arabic, but…

You want to stay stuck in the past, that's your call. I for one stay fascinated by the prospect of colour being introduced into written languages to denote intent now that we don't have to grapple with ink. We're talking on the scale of centuries, but even Arrival didn't have the guts to include colour into the lexicon of its alien language.

With, of course, accessibility for those needing it.

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#272

Post by philistine »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #256
xg15 wrote: post #124

This seems like approximately the dumbest possible place to have political battles. Isn't the entire purpose of having a standard set of emojis as part of Unicode to enable reliable communication of the concepts and emotions associated with them? In that sense it's perfectly fine if it was a water pistol, a real gun or whatever else as long as it's the same thing everywhere . But the same codepoint showing up as a wa…

Speaking objectively it’s either dumb or it matters. There’s no reality that exists where it was dumb so you shouldn’t care it was changed but it’s dumb so it shouldn’t be changed back because it’s dumb right so it doesn’t matter what it is… The people who changed it thought it mattered, the people changing it back do too so as dumb as it is, I guess it matters to both these groups, even if it is kinda dumb. These du…

I bet you more people prefer the water gun. Two opinions are not automatically equal. Especially with anything regarding languages, a consensus is to be respected.

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#273

Post by philistine »

waterhouse wrote: post #151
qual wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Not the person you were replying to) I'm curious what/how you define "woke culture", because the only definitions of "woke" I've ever heard are basically "thing I don't like" or "the left". Neither of those definitions have helped me understand what you are so vehemently against. Can you help me understand what woke culture is to you? This is a genuine question.

(Not the person you were asking, either) In one sentence, wokeness is aggressively pursuing racial (and other identity-based) conflict above everything else, not caring what else you trample on (including even classic civil rights principles). "Microaggressions" is probably the most distinctively woke concept. Censoring gun emojis is not woke in that respect, since it doesn't pursue any particular identity conflict (…

Should the App Store allow pornography? What about apps by terrorist organizations? Where does censorship begin to make sense to you?

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#274

Post by anonfordays »

qual wrote: post #110
theultdev wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a "veiled whistle blow", it's my personal belief. But yes, I am against woke culture at it's core, vehemently. In no way does an emoji encourage armed violence. Are you against violent video games as well?

(Not the person you were replying to) I'm curious what/how you define "woke culture", because the only definitions of "woke" I've ever heard are basically "thing I don't like" or "the left". Neither of those definitions have helped me understand what you are so vehemently against. Can you help me understand what woke culture is to you? This is a genuine question.

"Woke" is best described as an umbrella term for overrighteous performative moralizing leftist authoritarian fundamentalism. It's effectively used opposite of "fascism" which has become an umbrella term for "things I don't like" or "the right".

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#275

Post by porkbeer »

philistine wrote: post #272
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking objectively it’s either dumb or it matters. There’s no reality that exists where it was dumb so you shouldn’t care it was changed but it’s dumb so it shouldn’t be changed back because it’s dumb right so it doesn’t matter what it is… The people who changed it thought it mattered, the people changing it back do too so as dumb as it is, I guess it matters to both these groups, even if it is kinda dumb. These du…

I bet you more people prefer the water gun. Two opinions are not automatically equal. Especially with anything regarding languages, a consensus is to be respected.

Infantalizing tools of violence, or re-inforcing gun toys for kids, there is no good argument for the w'squirt gun.

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#276

Post by listless »

falcor84 wrote: post #236
sph wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

space ex -> space sex? It's literally one consonant sound away, not a "stretch" in any dialect of English.

I'm not trying to be obtuse, but literally don't understand how someone would get from "space ex" to "space sex" unless they are intentionally trying to stretch/double the consonant. To be clear, I'm willing to agree that it's a funny mispronunciation, but am unwilling to accept that this particular naming was an intentional juvenile joke by Musk. It's widely known he's a fan of the letter X, and I believe that fully…

Wait - it’s intentionally meant to sound like “space sex” right? I mean, it’s not 1:1 but it’s very close. Say it out loud 10 times.

But maybe possible it’s just all about the letter X for him?

Also, to clarify, I don’t dislike the guy. Nor do I dislike his naming. Just pointing out what I thought was the obvious.

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#277

Post by [deleted] »

philistine wrote: post #271
ploxiln wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more, fonts having multiple colors in a glyph was a huge complexity explosion for font rendering, for terminals, and more. You can see a very quick technical summary of different ways of encoding colors in fonts here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenType#Color_fonts But anyway, images should have remained separate things, png or whatever. Fonts rendering is complex enough with complex scripts e.g. Arabic, but…

You want to stay stuck in the past, that's your call. I for one stay fascinated by the prospect of colour being introduced into written languages to denote intent now that we don't have to grapple with ink. We're talking on the scale of centuries, but even Arrival didn't have the guts to include colour into the lexicon of its alien language. With, of course, accessibility for those needing it.

[deleted]

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#278

Post by whycome »

BoredPositron wrote: post #109
whycome wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its slow, but I'm pretty sure Unicode updated name. https://www.unicode.org/emoji/charts/emoji-list.html #1121

That might just be the worst implementation of lazy loading I've ever seen.

Is that what it is?! I just assumed slow server.

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#279

Post by recursive »

llm_trw wrote: post #241
recursive wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yes. I don't think it's really defensible to render a code point using a glyph with a different semantic meaning. But "inconsistent" emoji rendering will always be a thing.

Inconsistent implies there is some type of error in the rendering. This was done on purpose.

To me "inconsistent" just means different. I agree it's intentional.

Re: X redesigns water pistol emoji back to a firearm

#280

Post by oehpr »

OK. I have a modest proposal:

Anyone can use any emoji they want.

To achieve this users declare emoji's in a known format the browser recognizes inline in text, which includes a content hash of the emoji they wish to use. eg. ":T15PXExNem0xX:"

Browsers use a DHT and local emoji datastore looking to the DHT to fetch any emoji's seen in text but not present locally.

You may submit a picture to your browser to create an emoji, but it must be a 128x128 webp image. The browser calculates the hash, and puts it in your local datastore. You may now use this emoji anywhere.

A few things to think through here:

1. Would be nice to have an non profit come forward and make a nice big server act as a reliable hub to the emoji database. The nice thing is, basically anyone can step forward at any time and provide servers to the network. Anyone can serve the emoji to anyone as they are addressed by their hash.

2. Regarding offensive or hateful emoji's, I think the question "What if this is used to promote hate?" Is a good question to be asking. But try to keep in mind that the system I am outlining is meant to be communication infrastructure, not a platform. Think of it like a different way to write text. This system in and of itself isn't a platform at all, as the only way to discover and use emoji's is to see someone use it somewhere else. You can browse your local datastore, but that's it.

3. What about REALLY hateful or outright illegal content? IPFS is a guiding light here (in more ways than one if people are familiar with the project). Lists can be made of Violating content by third party organizations and browsers could be configured to subscribe to those lists, very similar to the way ad blocking networks work. Apparatus could be constructed from there to support DMCA and abuse reports and distribute block lists. These subscription lists are user configurable, in case those apparatus are captured or abused and users feel the need to revolt.

Likely more issues than this? I don't think there's anything that is insurmountable. But that's the rough outline. Instead of relying on the unicode consortium, take advantage of content hashing distribution networks to create user defined emoji's instead.

I think about a system a lot when stuff like this comes up. Because I ask, what would be the most popular examples in such a database look like? Do we think it would be close to what the unicode consortium laid out?

Post reply on HN