Google and others trying to redefine Bigot

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,519
1,142
113


Now it says
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
  1. a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.
    "don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city"

    Similar: Partisan

    It used to be “
    noun
    a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.”
    The thought police of the 1984 is real but it is in a different form. They keep changing and tweaking these things silently. Many people are happy they helped them regarding Biden and Democrats however they are a corporation motivated by profit. Eventually they will cross and conflict with your ideology and thoughts. What’s happening in the background that is being missed. This is the double edged sword. We keep giving them our trust and all of our personal information in exchange for information control.

Are you okay giving control of your thoughts and ideas to a corporation? Do you welcome this change and consider it an improvement. Was this worth it to get @ orange man is bad type of conditioning and programming? Is this worth the price? Where does it stop?
 
Last edited:

explorerzip

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2006
8,132
1,309
113
Their definition is quite similar to Webster's: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot Regardless, definitions are going to be slightly different depending on the reference you use and the meaning will change over time. That's the nature of language and not controversial.

The only way to give control over your thoughts to someone else or a company is to take things at face value, stop reading and thinking, rely on one source (or a tweet) or assume that there's a conspiracy at work.

You cannot combat this "censorship" by regulating the internet because it's near impossible now.

We have to work on our critical thinking and reading skills. Sadly, the school system has done a miserable job at it.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
89,044
21,164
113


Now it says
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
  1. a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.
    "don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city"

    Similar: Partisan

    It used to be “
    noun
    a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.”
    The thought police of the 1984 is real but it is in a different form. They keep changing and tweaking these things silently. Many people are happy they helped them regarding Biden and Democrats however they are a corporation motivated by profit. Eventually they will cross and conflict with your ideology and thoughts. What’s happening in the background that is being missed. This is the double edged sword. We keep giving them our trust and all of our personal information in exchange for information control.

Are you okay giving control of your thoughts and ideas to a corporation? Do you welcome this change and consider it an improvement. Was this worth it to get @ orange man is bad type of conditioning and programming? Is this worth the price? Where does it stop?
You are on to something here.
Time for you to redefine and decolonize the word 'bigot'.
Make it you own.
 

barnacler

Well-known member
May 13, 2013
1,477
859
113
There IS something to this, and I would say that the word HATE is a prime example of that. If you disagree with the position of a certain group of people, that is defined as hate, whereas it is really merely disagreement.
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,519
1,142
113
There IS something to this, and I would say that the word HATE is a prime example of that. If you disagree with the position of a certain group of people, that is defined as hate, whereas it is really merely disagreement.
Yes, true, they are changing some of these fundamental principles we have been conditioned to. Now many things keep getting labeled as hate that previous were not especially when a different political ideology is in conflict with another and there is a disagreement. It starts to lead to hate, bigotry, and intolerance etc.

It looks like they also changed a few other things like “sexual preference” being identified as offensive.

They also changed the word racism earlier in the year...https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/625669/merriam-webster-revises-racism-definition

How many more of these definitions have been changed, adjusted or modified without the masses knowing. https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/625669/merriam-webster-revises-racism-definition

Now it becomes a slippery slope how to correctly use these words and what this exactly means.

Not sure if these are changed across the board of all of our major sources for language. Dictionary.com still had the old definition of bigot last time I checked.

what concerns me is that majority of people especially our kids take google as the truth. They are growing up with these tweaks, and are being indoctrinated with new ideas and I question how well have these ideas been vetted to ensure it is not biased to a particular social justice movement or ideology of the time but inclusive of all, and takes the value humanity as the fundamental core principle and not some concept, idea, or ideology.

This is why I ask where does this go, how much has been changed, or deleted or modified without the masses even noticing. This is concerning because physical print is disappearing and we are relying on these organizations for information and the truth more and more as time passes and it becomes ubiquitous.

We are lucky that most of us already went through the school and had a chance to understand all these various ideologies and concepts however our kids and future generations might now know where are many valid ideologies that are acceptable.

What’s next the international federation of human rights. When does it become hate to believe in a political ideology.

I remember a few years back I was part of this face book social group in my local area and some people were joking about trump and memes and just being stupid. The mod of the group said if anyone brings trump up they will consider you as hate and ban you from the group. I never liked Trump from his apprentice show however this particular incident has got me questioning and observing this trend and to understand how a person can actu. Now I understand where this is head especially with all the politics happening like AOC looking for Trump supporter hit list...
I think this is all connected. They are infiltrating their ideology in all systems and making systematic changes and anyone who opposes or challenges them or is an obstacle will be identified as a threat and will be ego backlashes through these various systems being implemented like being now defined as hate is you disagree with a certain point of view or concept or ideology. You become the enemy. CNN is perfect example and how they keep belittling the other side, saying they are like drug addicts and need help and threaten physical harm against them
Now China is being involved with the international human rights and making recommendations on US human rights.
At the end of the day I believe that it is important to accept various ideologies and encourage diversity or beliefs and thoughts and not narrow it down to a few acceptable ones.
 

Gooseifur

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2019
3,828
440
83
What?
Words change definitions over time?

I AM COMPLETELY SHOCKED BY THIS TOTALLY EXPECTED DEVELOPMENT!
Why would you change the definition of an existing word? Make up a new one for what you're trying to define.
 

TeeJay

Well-known member
Jun 20, 2011
8,052
731
113
west gta
Why would you change the definition of an existing word? Make up a new one for what you're trying to define.
Try telling that to a 1920s era gay man
He would be horrified what current meaning was

Or how a cheater once was a loyal kings man

The current meaning of egregious is irony at it's best

A naughty person had nothing (naught)

Nice meant ignorant

Pretty meant crafty or cunning

Sly meant skillful

List goes on and on
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

explorerzip

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2006
8,132
1,309
113
Why would you change the definition of an existing word? Make up a new one for what you're trying to define.
People have been changing the meaning of words since language was invented. English is a global language precisely because it evolves. In addition, it is far more economical to change the meaning of words over time than try to come up with new ones every single time. There was once a time when we called people that did calculations with pen and paper "computers."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

explorerzip

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2006
8,132
1,309
113
what concerns me is that majority of people especially our kids take google as the truth. They are growing up with these tweaks, and are being indoctrinated with new ideas and I question how well have these ideas been vetted to ensure it is not biased to a particular social justice movement or ideology of the time but inclusive of all, and takes the value humanity as the fundamental core principle and not some concept, idea, or ideology.

This is why I ask where does this go, how much has been changed, or deleted or modified without the masses even noticing. This is concerning because physical print is disappearing and we are relying on these organizations for information and the truth more and more as time passes and it becomes ubiquitous.
The remedy to this is to teach your kids or those around you to think and read critically and not take one source as the absolute truth. Most of us would have learned those lessons while doing any kind of research project even before Google existed. That's all we can do as individuals. If you're a parent you have to be active in your kid's education and help them build those critical reading and thinking skills. You cannot just stick an iPad in front of them and hope for the best.

You are correct that it is far too easy to post things online that are partially or totally untrue and to change things. It wasn't like that in the pre-internet days because the technology just wasn't there. Today, false or misleading information can go global instantly.

Our reliance on these internet companies is only as much as we choose to use them. At the same time, that reliance on Google still makes it a lot easier to find multiple sources of information. You just have to be willing to put the time and effort to sort through the truth from the false or the in-between. It is a fact that we now have more access to information and courses than we ever had and a lot of it is free. That is a good thing overall. At the end of the day, you can still choose to buy physical books or go to a library.
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,519
1,142
113
Think of this scenario.

If you are a trump supporter I consider you hate and a threat to my existence. I am shaking at the thought of you being a trump supporter and feel applauded and offended. You will get labeled, canceled and who knows possibly even charged for being a trump supporter because you are a white supremacy racist who hates humanity and threatens my existence. I will contact and report you to the “authorities” to get flagged for thoughts and speech against humanity.

The Facebook group I was involved had nothing to do with politics when she said she would ban anyone who talks about Trump. This was 3 years ago and she literally said that she is shaking is disturbed and feels threatened for her existence.

Why is it that Twitter and YouTube and other major tech giants leave threatens on peoples lives and people being depicted with head on a stick as okay but trump support get censored, labeled, deleted and banned to shit.


example 2


Here is the hit list by AOC on Trump supporters and that was deemed okay by Twitter and this “social” “justice” ideology.


Difference now vs 1920s is that these words are being changed for a political and ideological purpose that do not represent the majority but an ideology. They are being forced feed down people throats and many have no clue what is happening.

The right to a political ideology is getting undermined especially our freedom of thought, speech, and expression. What was okay before is now being considered as hate and intolerant because a particular ideology determined this.



Try telling that to a 1920s era gay man
He would be horrified what current meaning was

Or how a cheater once was a loyal kings man

The current meaning of egregious is irony at it's best

A naughty person had nothing (naught)

Nice meant ignorant

Pretty meant crafty or cunning

Sly meant skillful

List goes on and on
 

|2 /-\ | /|/

Well-known member
Mar 5, 2015
6,519
1,142
113
Even though I agree with some of the stuff you said, I disagree with other points.

Like when you say it’s easy to find stuff on Google. I disagree especially when they go out of their way to censor a particular side and have been caught on video admitting to this.


Try finding good points on trump online but 3 different credible sources nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace prize. Go figure all those wars being messed with by USA in the past had any impact on this.

It’s easy to say that parents need to do a better job. Some parents can’t. They work all the time, they are single parent struggling, they are not as tech savvy and aware. So what happens next. These tech giants easily program and pawn the masses who can’t think critically for their purpose.

Maybe you are okay, maybe I will be okay. However what happens then to your freedom of thought and speech in the future. What happens to a society? What happens to true human rights and treating everyone as equal and having the freedom to choose an ideology free of hate from other ideologies. So it’s okay not to censor threats with pics of beheadings but if it conflicts with their chosen ideology it gets treated as being like a crime against humanity.

What would happen here if it was reversed?

Today they see Trump supporters as evil and hateful. Tomorrow it will be Christianity. Further from tomorrow it will be something you support.




The remedy to this is to teach your kids or those around you to think and read critically and not take one source as the absolute truth. Most of us would have learned those lessons while doing any kind of research project even before Google existed. That's all we can do as individuals. If you're a parent you have to be active in your kid's education and help them build those critical reading and thinking skills. You cannot just stick an iPad in front of them and hope for the best.

You are correct that it is far too easy to post things online that are partially or totally untrue and to change things. It wasn't like that in the pre-internet days because the technology just wasn't there. Today, false or misleading information can go global instantly.

Our reliance on these internet companies is only as much as we choose to use them. At the same time, that reliance on Google still makes it a lot easier to find multiple sources of information. You just have to be willing to put the time and effort to sort through the truth from the false or the in-between. It is a fact that we now have more access to information and courses than we ever had and a lot of it is free. That is a good thing overall. At the end of the day, you can still choose to buy physical books or go to a library.
 

lessjamie7

Well-known member
Mar 10, 2013
1,070
554
113


Now it says
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
  1. a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.
    "don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city"

    Similar: Partisan

    It used to be “
    noun
    a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.”
    The thought police of the 1984 is real but it is in a different form. They keep changing and tweaking these things silently. Many people are happy they helped them regarding Biden and Democrats however they are a corporation motivated by profit. Eventually they will cross and conflict with your ideology and thoughts. What’s happening in the background that is being missed. This is the double edged sword. We keep giving them our trust and all of our personal information in exchange for information control.

Are you okay giving control of your thoughts and ideas to a corporation? Do you welcome this change and consider it an improvement. Was this worth it to get @ orange man is bad type of conditioning and programming? Is this worth the price? Where does it stop?
Well, it comforts me to know that based on these definitions at some time in our lives we are all BIGOTS.

Now let's get back to getting ready for the weekend.

LJ
 

barnacler

Well-known member
May 13, 2013
1,477
859
113
Words change over time but it's an organic change that happens naturally. Google is trying to force change to suit its agenda. That's not natural. That's brainwashing.
Ah, but the key thing with this misuse of definitions is that THE OLD MEANING also has to still be in play. Doublespeak.

Take hate - no-one likes hate, do they? So when you make "disagree with a favored group" into "hate', you are in fact lying, because you are introducing a deliberate exaggeration that borrows the pejorative sense of the old meaning, which everyone still recognizes, and applying it to what is a quite different meaning, and in the process you are trying to get your value judgements forced through.

“Emergencies” have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have eroded.”
― Friedrich Hayek

“There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally and attempting to make them equal. While the first is the condition of a free society, the second means as De Tocqueville describes it, a new form of servitude.”
― Friedrich Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: |2 /-\ | /|/

explorerzip

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2006
8,132
1,309
113
Like when you say it’s easy to find stuff on Google. I disagree especially when they go out of their way to censor a particular side and have been caught on video admitting to this.

Try finding good points on trump online but 3 different credible sources nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace prize. Go figure all those wars being messed with by USA in the past had any impact on this.

It’s easy to say that parents need to do a better job. Some parents can’t. They work all the time, they are single parent struggling, they are not as tech savvy and aware. So what happens next. These tech giants easily program and pawn the masses who can’t think critically for their purpose.

Maybe you are okay, maybe I will be okay. However what happens then to your freedom of thought and speech in the future. What happens to a society? What happens to true human rights and treating everyone as equal and having the freedom to choose an ideology free of hate from other ideologies. So it’s okay not to censor threats with pics of beheadings but if it conflicts with their chosen ideology it gets treated as being like a crime against humanity.

Today they see Trump supporters as evil and hateful. Tomorrow it will be Christianity. Further from tomorrow it will be something you support.
Regardless if you're using Google, Bing, Yahoo, WaPo, Fox News, Project Veritas, The Lincoln Project, or just a good old book, you still have to filter it through your mind. That has not changed and never will. You or your parents don't need to be tech savvy to learn how to read, think and question the truth. You have to be willing to spend the time to learn those skills despite the other things going on in life. It is true that single / foster parents or non-traditional parental figures will have a tougher time, but that isn't an excuse not to do the job. At the end of the day, it's up to to the individual to learn those skills. Parents, the school system and government can only do so much.

These tech companies are powerful because we chose to make them that way and it did not happen overnight. We chose to use their services over other offerings. We chose to provide them with personal information. We chose not to consume traditional media like books, newspapers, magazines and television. So we chose the free and convenient options over substance. It's no one's fault per se, but those choice have consequences. At the same time, governments did not pay enough attention to what was going on in the technology space. I don't think it's impossible to reign in the influence of big tech, but it's going to be a massive job.

I have no idea what's going to happen in society, no one does. The inventors of any technology could not foresee what the future holds. I frankly don't care what happens to society because I have no control over it even as an elected official. I can only control my thoughts and attitudes and teach the people around me. It's up to them to decide how to take actions.

I'm not sure what you mean by "true human rights." I don't think there has ever been such a thing. People have always lived under varying levels of censorship. There has always been soft or hard limits on what you could say or write.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
31,866
58,252
113
Words change over time but it's an organic change that happens naturally. Google is trying to force change to suit its agenda. That's not natural. That's brainwashing.
Oh good lord.
Words change - both connotation and denotation.
Dictionaries exist in a state of tension as a record of the language as it is or was and a validation of language as it evolves.
Different dictionaries are more or less conservative about their pace of updating definitions to see if they have staying power.

What about this change strikes you as inorganic?
 

barnacler

Well-known member
May 13, 2013
1,477
859
113
Oh good lord.
Words change - both connotation and denotation.
Dictionaries exist in a state of tension as a record of the language as it is or was and a validation of language as it evolves.
Different dictionaries are more or less conservative about their pace of updating definitions to see if they have staying power.

What about this change strikes you as inorganic?
LAWS forcing it through is what I would call inorganic.
 
Toronto Escorts