Same question, same answer. The scientific process goes Hypothesis -> Theory. A Hypothesis is the supposition, a Theory is the explanation of something based on the observable data at hand. The things scientists use to describe replicable "fact".
-
-
Replying to @NekoBlanchard @meedeeums and
Unless you're extremely thick and completely reflect all incoming data, then you too could experience the wonders of understanding something based on months and months of observable data across millions of people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @AmazonFCBryan @meedeeums and
You're right I think I'm reaching here. Let me reset on why I think intent is necessary.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NekoBlanchard @meedeeums and
If you go off the definition of Censor: "an official who examines material that is about to be released, such as books, movies, news, and art, and suppresses any parts that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NekoBlanchard @meedeeums and
If the base noun requires someone to enact the censorship willingly and the outcome is intended permanence, I do think that intention to permanently sever access to that media is required for it to be labeled as censorship.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @AmazonFCBryan @meedeeums and
A life is not something that can be returned such as media, so the correlation can't be directly made. The algorithm would also likely never be so poorly conceived as to have a command to "kill" in specific.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NekoBlanchard @meedeeums and
If you created the confines of your algorithm responsibly and reversibly, as YouTube has, I don't think any shouldering of blame is necessary as you can simply hit the reset button and fix it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NekoBlanchard @meedeeums and
If YouTube's algorithm was made to permanently censor media irreversibly without confines, I think then the core problem would have been exacerbated to the point of extremity and the backlash would have been so profound as to go beyond customers to call for justice.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Though there have been examples of drone strikes killing innocents, with the families having little or no recourse. In those cases it seems that no punishment was ever really received on the end of the perpetrators. Too few directly affected witnesses. Hard to correlate on YT.
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.