• wucking_feardo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’ll grant that there’s no acceptable way to programmatically evaluate some text and infer from the text alone if it’s hate speech.

    That’s why I stick to a manual process to evaluate. For example, if enough people report you for misgendering others, and you do not adjust your behaviour it eventuallt becomes hate speech. But a human has to go and analyze this, it is difficult, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it.

    But your argument is that it’s impossible, and I just illustrated that it isn’t impossible. I do agree that it’s hard. But that’s just life for you. Nuance takes time and effort, as most worthwhile things do.

    • U missing my point entirely. How can a subjective experience of offence be hatespeach?

      The method for evaluation is irrelevant. My argument is that a subjective experience can be anything by anyone.

      My argument is not that its impossible to determine but thats since we disagree its impossible to reconcile hate speach and free speach for everyone our definitions of the 2 are different. Thus this answers ops question with a firm no its impossible. This conversion itself is proof. We are the counter example thus the alternative cannot be true. Proof by contradiction.