Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Censorship Communications Programming

The 'Scunthorpe Problem' Has Never Really Been Solved (vice.com) 382

dmoberhaus writes: Yesterday, a writer for SB Nation named Natalie Weiner posted a screenshot of a rejection form she received when she tried to sign up for a website. Her submission was rejected because a spam algorithm considered her last name "offensive." After she posted about this, hundreds of other people with similarly "offensive" last names sounded off about how they had experienced similar issues. As it turns out, this phenomenon is so widespread that it has a name among computer scientists. It's called the Scunthorpe problem and it's been a scourge of the internet since the beginning. Motherboard spoke to content moderation experts about its origins and why it's such a hard problem to solve 20 years later. A big reason why the problem has yet to be solved is "because creating effective obscenity filters depends on the filter's ability to understand a word in context," reports Motherboard. "Despite advances in [AI], this is something that even the most advanced machine-learning algorithms still struggle with today."

"This works both ways around," Michael Veale, a researcher studying responsible machine learning at University College London, told Motherboard. "Cock (a bird) and Dick (the given name) are both harmless in certain contexts, even in children's settings online, but in other cases parents might not want them used. Equally, those wanting to abuse a system can find ways around it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The 'Scunthorpe Problem' Has Never Really Been Solved

Comments Filter:
  • by GerryGilmore ( 663905 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:11PM (#57221832)
    ...on how silly/childish we still are by schoolyard snickering over "funny names". Apparently, we'll just never grow the fuck up.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by msauve ( 701917 )
      "how silly/childish we still are...fuck..."

      There you go, proving that it's not just "schoolyard snickering" which is rude.
      • by green1 ( 322787 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:53PM (#57222032)

        Or maybe he's trying to say that a word is just a word, and that we shouldn't spend so much time policing them as we could choose instead to just grow up and stop caring which combination of letters someone chose to put side by side.

        • Or maybe he's trying to say that a word is just a word, and that we shouldn't spend so much time policing them as we could choose instead to just grow up and stop caring which combination of letters someone chose to put side by side.

          All words convey meaning, and offensive words convey offensive meaning.

          Personally I think it's more childish to use those words, and then act like you're a martian that doesn't understand what language is or something, to dodge responsibility for conveying the very meaning that the words were fully intended to convey. .

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            All words convey meaning

            Not so.

            Many politicians go to great lengths to ensure their words have no meaning.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @10:12PM (#57222132)

      How is it, that supposedly grown-up people use childish concepts like being "offended" anyway? What are they? 13? Never left puberty?

      A grown-up, mature person either is confident enough, to know that if somebody's statement is wrong, then he's the idiot, and there is no need to do much about it.
      And if somebody's statement is wrong, he's able to handle that reality about him.

      As soon as he starts defending himself, he shows everyone, that the offense clearly contained something that he considers such a valid criticism, that he thinks it needs to be countered. That is what gives it validity in the first place.
      I don't expect a kid to know this, but definitely a grown-up!

      The problem today is, that everyone has become such an insecure loser (who'd be the prime target of bullies in any school in the 70s/80s), that everything that might suggest they are not perfect little snowflakes, shatters their entire world and excuse for a confidence. And then they lash out and bully others with "OMGOFFENDED!". Yes, bully. Since this has become the prime form of bullying today. Because you do not even have to attack anyone. All it takes, is them imagining you might mean something in a discriminating/offensive way. And let me tell you, ... they can "find" something in EVERYTHING!

      So what we need, is to stop raising our children without self-confidence. Without giving out trophies for participation. And with bullies, for the sole purpose of them growing from letting the bullies bounce off again and again. So they later, in the real world, don't have to become SJW terrorists.

      • How is it, that supposedly grown-up people use childish concepts like being "offended" anyway?

        I think that this syndrome is usually misunderstood. It's not really about people's "hurt feelings" - it's about their absolute need to control and dominate other people.

        That's one of the primary human instincts, and no matter what laws, customs or conventions are devised, it will spring up right through them like bamboo shoots in a garden.

        "Directly Man has his most elementary material wants, the first aspiration of his amiable heart is for the privilege of being able to look down on his neighbours".

        - Lord

    • by thomst ( 1640045 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @12:40AM (#57222616) Homepage

      GerryGilmore lamented:

      ...on how silly/childish we still are by schoolyard snickering over "funny names". Apparently, we'll just never grow the fuck up.

      Well - some of us don't.

      Religious types, for instance.

      I've been a customer of a certain online-warehouse music store for donkey's years, now (it rhymes with "Musician's Trend"). Naturally, they encourage customers to leave reviews of products we buy. So, a couple of years ago, I bought a Digitech RP1000 multi-effects pedal board from this operation. I was very pleased with it, and I succumbed to the urge to submit a review.

      I swiftly discovered the site's nanny filter had some peculiar notions about what it considered objectionable language. First of all, it will let you use neither the terms "dollar" or "dollars," nor the "$" character. It also flagged and blocked words that are dirty only by dint of extreme mental contortion - like "muff" for instance. That came up in the context of discussing distortion models included in the device. The Maestro Big Muff is kind of the Ur-fuzzbox. (If you know the song American Woman by the Guess Who, that lead guitar tone is the perfect example of what it does to a guitar's sound.) The RP1000 does a great job of emulating it, as well as many other classic distortions, overdrives, and fuzzboxen - but the nanny filter wouldn't let me mention the Big Muff by name - even though this Musician's Blend-sounding retailer stocks many variants of that pedal and solicits reviews for them!

      So, I don't bother posting reviews there, because the corporate pinheads who are responsible for emplacing that imbecilic thing in the first place refuse to treat their customers as adults - and I have zero interest in posting reviews about sophisticated digital electronic modeling gear for an audience of children ...

      • Must have been quite a while ago, the RP1000 is about as old as my GNX3000.

      • by Cederic ( 9623 )

        No contortion at all for muff to be deemed 'naughty'. It explicitly means vagina.

        Sure, it's a tamer word than minge but if a site is censoring then it's a legitimate target.

    • Ooooooohhhhhh... You said the fuck word... :D

    • by ( 4475953 )

      Putting bleeps over swear words on TV seems even more childish. I've seen comedians on Youtube who had several beeps in almost every sentence. You can still understand everything, so I guess it's more of a nostalgic tradition than being meant seriously. Otherwise, what's the point of this?

      • by Z00L00K ( 682162 )

        Censoring the reality never makes sense.

        If you have a problem with reality - then you may have to move to a secluded area with limited connection to the rest of the world. Maybe become Amish?

        Most English profanities are quite bland anyway.

  • by dskoll ( 99328 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:15PM (#57221850) Homepage

    The real reason it's a problem is because programmers are lazy bastards, and web developers are stupid lazy bastards.

    Yes, I'm a software developer. A disillusioned one.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by green1 ( 322787 )

      No, the real reason this is a problem is because for some reason people get offended by certain arbitrary strings of characters. That's the real root of the problem.

      For some reason there's great outrage if someone uses a slang word to describe sex, or genetalia, both of which are perfectly natural parts of life.

      • by piojo ( 995934 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @11:33PM (#57222422)

        No, the real reason this is a problem is because for some reason people get offended by certain arbitrary strings of characters.

        No, it's not. I don't get offended by profanity (except in the sense of being bad writing), but I still don't want to communicate with people that only wish to get a rise out of me. For that purpose, blocking profanity (in some contexts) is useful beyond what does or does not offend me.

        And don't forget that language is for description. An offensive concept will always have offensive words or phrases that describe it. (I don't expect humanity to mature to the point that nothing offends.)

      • No, the real reason this is a problem is because for some reason people get offended by certain arbitrary strings of characters. That's the real root of the problem.

        No, still wrong. It's because for some reason some "important" people, i.e. those in charge for what a company writes and what it let's people write on their digital premises, FEAR that people might get offended. While most people actually don't.

      • No, the real reason this is a problem is because for some reason people get offended by certain arbitrary strings of characters. That's the real root of the problem.

        For some reason there's great outrage if someone uses a slang word to describe sex, or genetalia, both of which are perfectly natural parts of life.

        This is disingenuous.

        All words are "arbitrary strings of characters" that convey meaning. Those that convey offensive meaning are used for that purpose; because they get attention, have that zing, make you feel naughty or adult, etc.

        Offensive words are offensive, because words convey meaning and that is the meaning that offensive words convey.

        As an analogy, try uttering public threats, and then tell the judge that people shouldn't get alarmed by arbitrary strings of characters. Words convey meaning, and

    • Don't use fucking filters to filter out fucking offensive language.

    • by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @12:31AM (#57222586) Journal
      It’s not an easy problem to solve, as the article points out. Laziness has nothing to do with it. On the other hand, my last name has been flagged “offensive” for years... because it has an apostrophe in it which choked many websites, airline reservation systems, etc. That problem has been solved in the end, thanks to Bobby Tables.
      • I am honestly surprised there has been a problem in the first place because a lot of Irish surnames have one.

    • Indeed.

      Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Names [kalzumeus.com]

      People have exactly one canonical full name.
      People have exactly one full name which they go by.
      People have, at this point in time, exactly one canonical full name.
      People have, at this point in time, one full name which they go by.
      People have exactly N names, for any value of N.
      People's names fit within a certain defined amount of space.
      People's names do not change.
      People's names change, but only at a certain enumerated set of events.
      People's names are writte

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:18PM (#57221860)

    It's called the Scunthorpe problem because it has the word "cunt" in it, and that prevented the good people of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England from creating accounts with AOL back when that was relevant.

    There, saved y'all a click, since that's probably the only thing you were interested in about this story anyway.

    • Well, to be fair, it *IS* America On-Line, not England On-Line...
    • There, saved y'all a click, since that's probably the only thing you were interested in about this story anyway.

      No, you didn't save me a click, because I knew this already.

      It would have been more informative had you listed more names with the same problem. England has lots of them.

    • by quenda ( 644621 )

      It's called the Scunthorpe problem because it has the word "cunt" in it, and that prevented the good people of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England from creating accounts with AOL back when that was relevant.

      There, saved y'all a click, since that's probably the only thing you were interested in about this story anyway.

      They were more fortunate than anyone living in Gropecunt Lane [wikipedia.org] .

    • by cyn1c77 ( 928549 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @01:15AM (#57222708)

      It's called the Scunthorpe problem because it has the word "cunt" in it, and that prevented the good people of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England from creating accounts with AOL back when that was relevant.

      There, saved y'all a click, since that's probably the only thing you were interested in about this story anyway.

      No, now I want to know why Scunthorpe was named Scunthorpe!

      • by Cederic ( 9623 )

        As Wikipedia notes, "The town appears in the Domesday Book (1086) as Escumesthorpe, which is Old Norse for "Skuma's homestead""

        See about two thirds of the way down the left column:
        http://opendomesday.org/book/l... [opendomesday.org]

        Note that thorpe (and thorp) is a common suffix for a place name in that part (and others) of England, and generally means 'hamlet'. Scunny has grown a little since being named.

      • by Chrisq ( 894406 )

        It's called the Scunthorpe problem because it has the word "cunt" in it, and that prevented the good people of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England from creating accounts with AOL back when that was relevant.

        There, saved y'all a click, since that's probably the only thing you were interested in about this story anyway.

        No, now I want to know why Scunthorpe was named Scunthorpe!

        From wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:

        The town appears in the Domesday Book (1086) as Escumesthorpe, which is Old Norse for "Skuma's homestead", a site which is believed to be in the town centre close to where the present-day Market Hill is located.

      • Not sure, but it's not far from Peniston

    • It's called the Scunthorpe problem because it has the word "cunt" in it, and that prevented the good people of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England from creating accounts with AOL back when that was relevant.

      Thor reportedly had trouble getting an AOL account for this very same reason. (He had a summer home there.)

  • by careysub ( 976506 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:24PM (#57221876)

    But I sure know the problem. I was once tasked with creating software that would flag objectionable content posted on-line. And the business types were worried about people using "banned terms" altered by look-alike characters a la Leetish (oops... 1337.sh), or spurious punctuation inserted, so I built a finite automaton matcher for database of banned terms, and applied filters during matching so that remapped characters and certain inserted punctuation would not prevent matching.

    Totally useless. When such software is run against pages of normal text, with the suspected "banned terms" being high-lighted red, it is really surprising how often (or how many) buried obscenities pass under our eyes, and we are not sufficiently "little old ladyish" to notice.

  • by Mal-2 ( 675116 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:33PM (#57221924) Homepage Journal

    Simple searches are never going to solve the problem. They simply have no situational awareness. One of my favorite examples would be when 8chan was in the midst of the exodus from 4chan, and someone thought it would be funny to word filter all instances of "moot" into "cuck". I discovered this when one of myposts had the word "smooth" changed into the non-word "scuckh". I wasn't the only one to figure it out, and very quickly people were evading it by using a Cyrillic "o" instead of a Latin "o". This led to much hilarity as some people complained loudly that they were being filtered while others were not. It got to the point where people were putting a lookalike "moot" into posts simply to bait n00bs into thinking the filters no longer existed.

    This was pretty harmless, but it demonstrated quite well why defining some regexps is never going to solve a social problem, and introduces many of its own.

  • Fuck Puritanism (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mentil ( 1748130 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:36PM (#57221944)

    My health class had to coax us students to all say 'penis' and 'vagina' several times just to loosen up enough to talk about anatomy and sexual health. Genital shame feeds into our culture's sex negativity, and indirectly into bodily shame, all in a vicious circle. We would be much happier as a culture if we went out of our way to promote sex positivity and body acceptance. Unfortunately the Abrahamic religions are too invested in sex negativity, so I'm not hopeful that things will improve until secularism becomes more dominant.

    • This is more of an American thing than a religious thing. Europeans mostly think Americans are terrible prudes.

      • Re:Fuck Puritanism (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Calydor ( 739835 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @01:21AM (#57222728)

        Which Europeans? The religious ones or the atheist ones?

        Sex negativity IS a religious thing and not just a Christian one. Look at muslims that need to have their women covered up from head to toe to avoid getting the urge to jump them any chance they get.

        • by Teun ( 17872 )

          Which Europeans? The religious ones or the atheist ones?

          In either case the majority.

      • by Tom ( 822 )

        Yes, because Europe exported most of its prudes to the USA (most of the early settlers left Europe because everyone there was tired with their attitude).

        However, Europe also went backwards a lot. Greeks, Romans, Germanic tribes and Celtic tribes all had a much more relaxed attitude towards nudity, sex, homosexuality and every other related topic.

    • I can honestly say that if I was a teacher, and had to do a sex ed class, I would very likely end up flushing my job down the toilet with endless substitutions. That is, after the first instances of penis, vagina, buttocks, anus, and breasts; I would then use a different slang each time the opportunity presented itself after. I would probably work taint in there as well.

      I just would not be able to help it. :D

    • My health class had to coax us students to all say 'penis' and 'vagina' several times just to loosen up enough to talk about anatomy and sexual health. Genital shame feeds into our culture's sex negativity, and indirectly into bodily shame, all in a vicious circle. We would be much happier as a culture if we went out of our way to promote sex positivity and body acceptance. Unfortunately the Abrahamic religions are too invested in sex negativity, so I'm not hopeful that things will improve until secularism becomes more dominant.

      Meh. Hardly anybody is interested in censoring those words when used without offensive intent.

      All words are just sounds that carry meaning in context, and part of the meaning of the offensive ones is that they are offensive (when used that way).

      A certain kind of juvenile mind loves to use those words for that very reason (they get attention for being offensive), and then deny any such intent and argue semantics when called on it.

  • by tepples ( 727027 ) <.tepples. .at. .gmail.com.> on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:38PM (#57221956) Homepage Journal

    Does it take a company as big as WeightWatchers to convince curators/censors to make an exception to the Scunthorpe problem? Like Scunthorpe, WeightWatchers has embedded sexual slang in the middle.

    • by niks42 ( 768188 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @05:25AM (#57223368)
      My favourite was when PowerGen opened a web site for their Italian operation, called powergenitalia.com ..
      • Then of course, Wang... There's a joke about them opening an office in Cologne (Germany), but no one wanted to work there because no one wanted to go to Wang Cologne.

        But they did (so I'm told by an ex-employee) try to set up their global support programme. The region director for Europe had to explain to Dr. Wang personally why they'd changed the name from Wang Care.

        I used to work with a guy called Paul Mycock (who also had a doctorate). Go look him up on linkedin for a list of other great names in the "peo

  • by SvnLyrBrto ( 62138 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:47PM (#57221994)

    Even without mindless string matching, there are pinhead bureaucrats who will equally mindlessly reject reasonable requests for harmless strings on similarly specious grounds. A few years back, seeing that it was (by some miracle, I thought) untaken, I tried to snag "YT-1300" as a personalized license place. Yes, I'm that nerdly. Also, nothing good with "1701" was available. Some pencil-pusher at the DMV actually denied the application on the claim that YT-1300 is a "gang-related" term. WTF?!?!? Yeah. I'm to believe that there're gangs of Star Wars fans out there somewhere doing drive-bys at Star Trek conventions, hoping to "pop a cap in the ass" of the Trekkies. Sure Mr. DMV person. And you wonder why we all hate you and your kind.

    Okay. Disney may have had something to say on copyright or trademark grounds if I *HAD* gotten the plate. But still...

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by Tom ( 822 )

      This is not untypical.

      In Germany, there are certain letter combinations disallowed on license plates. You know, things like "SS". Then, recently, there was a discussion to disallow "88", which, surprise, neo-nazis have used as a code to get around all the "SS" filters everywhere...

      Humans are like the Internet. They will route around censorship.

  • Pecker (Score:5, Funny)

    by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:53PM (#57222028) Journal

    I bet there are a lot of websites having trouble with the name, "David Pecker". He's been in the news lately because he was running the National Enquirer and has a safe filled with information about Donald Trump potentially getting peed on and having sex with ladyboys and paying for abortions and who knows what else. He's also been given immunity by the Special Counsel and is currently cooperating, which means we're in good shape for entertaining news at least through the end of the year.

    There have been so many jokes about David Pecker's name, that the Enquirer sent out a request to the news media to please stop snickering when talking about him. The request was written by the Enquirer's head of public relations, Fanny Goblincock.

  • by RonVNX ( 55322 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:55PM (#57222044)

    The solution to the problem has always existed. Turn off the dumbass filter.

  • It is NOT hard. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    why it's such a hard problem to solve

    It is not a hard problem to solve. It is a very easy problem to solve. It is literally the Easiest problem to solve.

    Stop trying to decide what's obscene and what isn't. Remove the filter. Boom, problem solved.

    "Of all the strange "crimes" that human beings have legislated
    out of nothing, "blasphemy" is the most amazing -- with
    "obscenity" and "indecent exposure" fighting it out for second
    and third place." - Robert Heinlein.

  • by Applehu Akbar ( 2968043 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @10:07PM (#57222104)

    When the old-line mail order purveyor of fine writing instruments Pen Island became aware of the potential of online commerce, it registered the obvious penisland.com . The company was totally unprepared for the porn avalanche that followed. Similar hilarity ensued when Experts Exchange came online.

  • I don't think you need an AI to screen names, especially on emails. Obscenity filters aren't going to pick up anything on the name of the sender that they won't find in the body of an email. If the body of the email isn't flashing red with signs of abuse, then chances are... that your sender's name is fine, even if it's a last name like Weiner (which would be an absolutely idiotic thing for an obscenity filter to pick up on in the first place).

    Filters like this are designed to be gamed. If your users have a

  • by FeelGood314 ( 2516288 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @11:11PM (#57222352)
    I wrote the program to create pass codes for the Webkinz children's toys. I probably should have looked at the codes created more carefully. About 1 in a million codes began 'F' 'U' 'C' 'K'. We then created a list of bad words and ran it against the codes we had already shipped. Not my finest day when I saw the result. Sorry to anyone who was offended.
    • ...And you should be sorry for what you did. Shame! Shame on your whole family! You should know better!

      ...than to ship product with a four digit security code. You know how easy that is to break? You are practically giving away passwords with a length of four. My god man, I bet you DIDN'T EVEN SALT YOUR DB.

      I am so very dissapoint.
  • by Yaztromo ( 655250 ) on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @11:30PM (#57222414) Homepage Journal

    Way back in the day, I was affiliated with a BBS that had filters for "obviously fake" names. I wound up getting peripherally involved when a Mr. Bob Blow tried to sign up for an account, and kept getting an automated rejection accusing him of using a false name.

    Some years later, with another BBS, it took two years before anyone suspected Mr. Mike Oxlarge was using a fake name. Everyone knew who this person was online -- it only came to light when someone said his name in the office one day after a tech support call.

    Mind you, it wasn't a problem for Mr. Takeshita, although it probably should have been. An IBM system mandated a maximum of 8 characters username, and corporate policy was to just the persons last name, truncated to 8 characters. Oops.

    Yaz

  • Sadly, my favourite pub in all of southern England, The Cock, does not sell t-shirts or mugs.

    A splendid marketing opportunity...wasted.

    • by 6Yankee ( 597075 )

      There was one of those near where I worked about 15 years ago, somewhere in Hertfordshire.

      Just across the street and a few doors down, another pub: The Queen's Head.

      • by Whibla ( 210729 )

        Years ago I heard a (probably) apocryphal story about the landlady at a similarly named pub in Hertfordshire. The pub in question, in the village of Tillet, was called the Black Cock, and the landlady's name was Lucy Likes.

        Were one to address a letter to her the envelope would read:

        Lucy Likes
        The Black Cock
        Tillet
        Herts.

  • At a former employer we had an internal collaboration system. This had a rude words filter but it was "turned up to 11" which meant that some day to day discussions were rendered completely pointless.

    For example: "Press down hard on the cover and release the screw" became "Press down ********* and release the ******" which wasn't any help to anyone.

    It ended up with posts either being strangely formatted (e.g. sc r ew) or [esp. when they were aimed at senior management] using convoluted phrases [attachment

  • The real Scunthorpe problem is that it's a shit-hole in the middle of nowhere.

  • Illiterate Americans.
    The sausage is called Wiener after the Austrian capital Wien (Vienna).
    And then there is the issue of pronunciation...
  • Tangentially to the issue at hand, I once read about someone whose family name was Null, and it indeed regularly caused issues when his name was entered in some databases.
  • I'm not allowed to have 'FSCK" as my team name for CoD since it is clearly derived from a rude word. Most annoying, since we here all know from where it really comes.

    Bunch of pussies.
  • At IBM Havant many moons ago, the online expense claim program identified key words in claims, and flagged amounts that exceeded thresholds. If I came back from the States with a meal receipt for more than 34 bucks, I quickly found that identifying the expense as 'a healthy repast' avoided the word filter quite nicely.
  • .. or other words where in one region the term has a colloquial meaning (Fanny being a slightly more polite version of Pussy in English Mark 1) and in another a more benign meaning? I could wax lyrical about the differences between English Mark 1 and the language of our colonial brethren in the US.

    And then there are other languages in the world, after all. I remember my German colleagues giggling at an American stand at CeBIT in Hannover, whose company name was "Blast, Inc". Something to do with blowing,
  • wrong problem (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tom ( 822 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @05:02AM (#57223286) Homepage Journal

    A big reason why the problem has yet to be solved is "because creating effective obscenity filters depends on the filter's ability to understand a word in context," reports Motherboard. "Despite advances in [AI], this is something that even the most advanced machine-learning algorithms still struggle with today."

    The real reason why the problem exists at all is because we think that we need obscenity filters. Because your childs psyche is going to be irrepairable traumatized if it reads words like "cunt" or "penis", right?

    Small children don't care. The worst that will happen is that they ask you to explain what that word means.

    By the time they care, they already know what it means.

    Not to even mention that this is the one area where humanity has managed to turn half the dictionary into synonyms for the words you are trying to filter out. Good luck filtering that.

  • by gotan ( 60103 ) on Thursday August 30, 2018 @05:04AM (#57223290) Homepage

    Sure, spam filters make sense because they spare you to deal with a text you don't want to read anyway (and even then you have to check the spam box every once in a while), but those are far more sophisticated now.

    But "profanity filters", especially those that replace "fuck" by "f..k" and are easily circumvented by "f*ck" don't help at all. Everyone knows what it's supposed to mean and just replaces "f..k" with "fuck" in their own head. The stupid beeping in TV-shows is even worse. Not only is it annoying as hell, it also nicely highlights all the swearwords, and everyone just replaces it in their own head anyway.

    Language is there to convey meaning, when "f..k" conveys the same meaning as "fuck", then what difference does it make. To try to keep the meaning intact and at the same time censor it doesn't work.

    It's not about "protecting" kids either. They're usually pretty quick to figure such things out and have enough peers who'll tell them anyway. They will learn about swearing and foul language anyway. They should learn that such language is inappropriate for them to use, or for adults to use in their presence, just like they learn that it's inappropriate for them e.g. to drink alcohol or for an adult to offer them alcohol.

    So who is more offended by "fuck" than by "f..k", when both mean the same thing and both make you think the same word?

    Whoever uses "f..k" want's you to replace it with "fuck" in your own head but at the same time claim not to use "foul language".
    Now that i find offensive.

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Working...