Thanks To Apple's Influence, You're Not Getting A Rifle Emoji (buzzfeed.com) 569
Charlie Warzel, reporting for BuzzFeed News: Unicode, the technical organization in charge of selecting and overseeing emojis, debated and ultimately decided to remove a rifle from its list of new emoji candidates in 2016, according to multiple persons who attended its quarterly meeting last May. The decision was led and championed by one of tech's biggest companies: Apple. Apple is one of Unicode's largest member companies and not only has voting rights, but also holds considerable influence. Millions of people use emojis on Apple's software platforms. According to sources in the room, Apple started the discussion to remove the rifle emoji, which had already passed into the encoding process for the Unicode 9.0 release this June. Apple told the consortium it would not support a rifle on its platforms and asked for it not to be made into an emoji. "I heard Apple speak up about it and also Microsoft," one member present at the discussions told BuzzFeed News.
frist post (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:frist post (Score:4, Insightful)
It actually makes sense not to have such an emoji, because it creates a dilemma whether someone using such an emoji in a message is making a threat, and whether the company, becoming aware of such a threat, has a duty to do something about it.
Obesity kills far more humans than "rifles" ever will, and yet you see no artists blocking food emojis, and no companies worrying about what do to when someone posts a cake emoji.
Gotta love the logic surrounding this bullshit argument.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
So food emoji's can't really be perceived of as threats... at least not generally speaking, but a rifle pic could easily be seen as one, depending on the context.
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
So, if I were to use a rifle emoji on /., you'd feel threatened? Really?
Or perhaps you'd only feel threatened if the guy in the next cubicle used one in an email? Seriously, I hope you know the guy in the next cubby well enough to know whether he'd want to shoot you. And if he did (want to shoot you), I'd hope he'd use a real gun rather than an emoji....
C'mon, people, when you start finding a few characters in an email threatening, there's a problem. And the problem isn't the arrangement of the characters....
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, I hope you know the guy in the next cubby well enough to know whether he'd want to shoot you. And if he did (want to shoot you), I'd hope he'd use a real gun rather than an emoji.
Funny that you should mentioned that...
http://www.threepanelsoul.com/comic/on-close-quarters [threepanelsoul.com]
http://www.threepanelsoul.com/comic/on-pink-slips [threepanelsoul.com]
http://www.threepanelsoul.com/comic/on-unemployment [threepanelsoul.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I am threatened by all emojis equally. They should all be banned from entering the US.
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
this is the US, where guns are easy and cheap to get, and people get routinely shot over the dumbest shit
Your argument is invalid. There is no linkage between email and guns in the US. And while it may be true that people get "routinely shot" (I don't know what you mean by that), this is not because guns are "cheap and easy to get". The US has more guns now than ever before, yet violent crime has been decreasing over the past decades. Look, here's some graphs [aei.org].
If the simple availability of legal guns really caused violence, then now that we have more guns than ever before, we ought to have more violence than ever before. Yet we don't.
In fact, one could make an argument that the increase in the number of guns reduced the violence in the US. I don't make that argument because correlation does not prove causation. However, you are making a causation claim and there isn't even a correlation to back you up.
I invite you to read the book The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy which explores why different countries have different amounts of violence. Spoiler: it's more cultural factors than anything else.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Combine the populations of
France
UK
Australia
Germany
Japan
Switzerland
Sweden
Denmark
and you get roughly the same population as that of the USA.
All those countries combined average a yearly death by firearm total of 112.
The USA manages an average of 32,000.
You can spin statistics any way you want but it will take more than Donald Trump to turn those figures around and make them acceptable.
Re: frist post (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't a no-guns-anywhere vs. everyone-including-violent-criminals-and-the-clinically-insane-must-have-guns argument. Only a few atoms of common sense are needed to realise that there is a spectrum of possibilities, and that arguing for or against extremes is just talking to hear yourself talk.
First, the American people need education. They need to know what guns are used for (other than mass murder), what types of guns are actually available and the difference between automatic and semi-automatic, an
details (Score:4, Insightful)
1) it's a bipod, not a tripod
2) a scope is a perfectly reasonable attachment for any 5.56/.223 rifle - effective range can go out to 100 to 200m, and a good scope is helpful at those ranges
3) whether or not it uses a drum magazine, or a simple double stack magazine, the weapon still functions like any other semi-automatic rifle -> one trigger pull, one shot.
Now, you can choose to define an "assault weapon" as something black and scary looking, but nothing you've pointed out is any different than the much kinder, gentler looking mini 14 (http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14/images/line-top.jpg). During the san bernardino terrorist attack, you can see LEOs using it: http://media.gettyimages.com/p... [gettyimages.com] - it's functionally identical to the AR15 style weapons the terrorists were using, chambering the same round, firing at the same rate.
A common sense definition of an "assault weapon" is a fully automatic (not semi-automatic) belt fed machine gun...something like the m60 (http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/guns/images/5/58/M60.PNG/revision/latest?cb=20070330224515)
But you really weren't looking for the truth, now were you? :)
Re:frist post (Score:4, Insightful)
Now explain how those "assault rifles" are evil, but the KelTec SU-16CA [keltecweapons.com] is not. The SU-16CA is 100% compliant with those "assault weapons" lists, but it:
- Uses the same magazines (STANAG)
- Uses the same caliber and rounds
- Same reload operation/time
- Same operation (semi-automatic)
- Same barrel length (16")
- Same terminal velocity and accuracy
The AR-15 is banned by most "assault weapons" lists, but the SU-16CA passes with flying colors. The reality is that the list is simply made up from what some people consider "scary". It's cosmetic fluff worse than the TSA kabuki theater of security.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with you completely. The SU-16CA should not be available to the general public either.
Re: (Score:3)
So which one of your rules or lines would have stopped Omar from getting his rifle? he had a background check, was a trained security armed guard and had gone through basic police academy traingin - so he was trained. His firearms were registered. So he could have gotten them according to your rules. It wouldn't stop that lone wolf. That's the problem with just passing laws - they don't work to prevent, only to penalize.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you also want a 100-round drum magazine when defending yourself? Who are you defending yourself from, the University of Texas marching band?
Please explain to me why any civilian has a need for a 100-round magazine or why they should be sold.
Re: (Score:3)
The Orlando shooter killed ~50, wounded 50, over 3 hours. About 1 per 2 minutes, although the bulk were probably shot in the first ~20 minutes (my guess). Reload times increasing from 2-3 seconds (someone who has practiced speed reloading detachable magazines) to 5-10 seconds will not cause a significant decline in casualties during a mass shooting in a target-rich, enclosed environment.
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
In most countries, you'd be right to heap scorn on anyone feeling threatened by an emoji or an email.
But this is the US, where guns are easy and cheap to get, and people get routinely shot over the dumbest shit. Dude might be a bit of scaredy cat, but he's certainly not insane.
Gun violence is at an all time low
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... [huffingtonpost.com]
http://www.pewresearch.org/fac... [pewresearch.org]
http://www.cnsnews.com/comment... [cnsnews.com]
I know, pesky facts. Who cares about'em
Re:frist post (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah...for the US. Let me put it this way: You might have cut off the crusts, but you're still eating a shit sandwich.
Re: (Score:3)
41,149 - suicide (21,175 of them by firearms, about 2/3 of all firearm deaths)
38,861 - accidental poisonings and overdoses (passed traffic accidents recently)
37,908 - (land) motor vehicle accidents (nearly 3/4 alcohol-related)
30,208 - accidental falls (mostly among the elderly)
16,904 - other accidents
16,121 - homicide (11,208 by firearms)
4,587 - Other undetermin
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
Gun violence is at an all time low.
Compared to the rest of the developed world, gun violence in the USA is still at appalling levels.
Re:frist post (Score:4, Insightful)
But still more than other developed countries by a lot. I mean a WHOLE lot.
And mass shootings in the US are at an all-time high. No matter how you cut it, we are one violent and fucked up culture that loves guns.
https://docs.google.com/spread... [google.com]
Re:frist post (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Let's see... hmm... there are two guards, I know they're armed, and nobody else is likely to be. Take out the two guards and I'm home free."
-vs-
"There are only two guards, but it's common for people to be armed. I probably won't get very far even if I take out the guards first."
See how tho
Re: (Score:3)
Or, you know, sensible gun legislation could be in place like in Canada, the UK, Japan, Scandanavian countries, France, etc. and mass shootings would be aberrations instead of weekly occurrences.
But hey, don't let reality get in the way of the Die Hard fantasy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If just one patron of that night club last week had a gun, they could have put one between the shooter's eyes when he first started shooting and fewer people would have died.
That argument falls apart inside a crowded night club. Bar tender calls for final drinks, shooter opens fire with an assault rifle. The first 20 to 30 people in front of the shooter are already dead. The person with a concealed gun may already be dead. People starts running to the exits. The person with a concealed gun may already be the first one out the door. Shooter loads a new clip in. The person with a concealed gun may be standing on the far side of the room, drunk and stoned out of his/her mind, prob
Re: (Score:2)
Bar tender calls for final drinks, shooter opens fire with an assault rifle. The first 20 to 30 people in front of the shooter are already dead.
Waaay too much Hollywood there, pal. He had a firearm, not a death ray.
Re: (Score:2)
Bar tender calls for final drinks, shooter opens fire with an assault rifle. The first 20 to 30 people in front of the shooter are already dead.
Yes, with an assault rifle, which would be fully automatic and not legally purchased by our shooter. What he had was an "assault rifle", in that it looked menacing, but was a single-fire semi-automatic weapon legally purchased days before the shooting. Had it been an actual assault rifle, gun bans would have done nothing to prevent the shooting anyway, as those are already illegal.
Re: (Score:3)
It fits in every portion of the definition minus the automatic...
I'd argue that it fits "rapid-fire" pretty damn well. You can very easily squeeze off 4-5 rounds a second with that weapon, and with a 30-round mag, that's 6 seconds to wipe out 20-30 people.
Very fun gun to shoot. Really only good for feeling like you're playing real life counterstrike against targets... or people.
I've owned firearms since I was a wee boy... but chris
Re: (Score:3)
There is no distinction between SIG MCX, and any other semi-automatic rifle. They all let you " easily squeeze off 4-5 rounds a second", and most of them accept detachable magazines of essentially unlimited capacity.
Ruger Mini-14 is not an "assault rifle" (at least not by any existing definitions), yet it could do everything MCX did.
If you don't have a problem with people owning Mini-14s, then there's no objective reason why they shouldn't be able to own MCX.
If you do have a problem with people owning eithe
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That argument falls apart inside a crowded night club. Bar tender calls for final drinks, shooter opens fire with an assault rifle. The first 20 to 30 people in front of the shooter are already dead.
That's Sig-Sauer rifle is a SEMI-automatic. One pull, one bullet. Sorry. He took THREE HOURS to shoot a little over 100 people. That's only TWO PER MINUTE (average).
he person with a concealed gun may already be dead. People starts running to the exits. The person with a concealed gun may already be the first one out the door.
"May" this, "May" that. But what WAS was Fish-In-A-Barrel.
There is absolutely NO argument you can logically make that doesn't INCREASE the odds on the side of the "Fish", if they are armed. None.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You know what stops mass shootings?
Yes I do: Creating a culture where it is very difficult to get a gun. You know why there aren't mass shootings in Japan?
Nutballs who want to kill a room full of people can't lay their hands on a gun.
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, I can definitely see how a rifle emoji would be threatening, but a dagger [emojipedia.org], crossed swords [emojipedia.org], skull and crossbones [emojipedia.org], a bomb [emojipedia.org], or even a pistol [emojipedia.org] clearly aren't.
There's already a pistol emoji. There's no reason not to add a rifle emoji for completeness sake.
Re: (Score:2)
so many millions of people died last century for want of a rifle... maybe they don't want to offend those who are still unable to obtain one?
like showing a man dying of thirst an ice cold glass of water.
Re: (Score:2)
OMG, Apple supports terrorism! [miguelcarrasco.net]
Re: (Score:2)
True... but shootings kill more people than force feeding another person does.
I doubt your statement is true if you ignore suicides (as they're self-inflicted) and hold parents accountable for their obese kids (just as you would hold gun owners accountable for accidents, kids getting at their guns, etc).
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
It actually makes sense not to have such an emoji, because it creates a dilemma whether someone using such an emoji in a message is making a threat, and whether the company, becoming aware of such a threat, has a duty to do something about it.
Obesity kills far more humans than "rifles" ever will, and yet you see no artists blocking food emojis, and no companies worrying about what do to when someone posts a cake emoji.
Gotta love the logic surrounding this bullshit argument.
Cakes aren't designed with the express purpose of killing things.
Bullshit argument indeed.
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
Cakes aren't designed with the express purpose of killing things.
Neither are emoji's.
How many apps/games/etc are there where guns, violence, etc are possible, if not the goal?
"The usual road to (digital) slavery is that first they take away your gun (emoji's), then they take away your property, then last of all they tell you to shut up and say you are enjoying it." -- James A. Donald
Re: (Score:2)
Cakes aren't designed with the express purpose of killing things
I see that you've never read Asterix and Cleopatra...
Re: (Score:3)
Cakes aren't designed with the express purpose of killing things.
Bullshit argument indeed.
While talking about bullshit, care to explain this emoji [emojipedia.org] and why Apple also has the most realistic depiction of it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
An Assault Rifle [wikipedia.org] has a large capacity magazine (often >25 rounds) and an automatic and/or burst fire mode. Hunting rifles are either bolt action or semi-auto and usually have smaller magazine capacities (1-5) and are often chambered for larger calibers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the useless term you're looking for is "assault weapon", which is essentially just a scary looking semi-auto rifle. And I'd call the Ruger mini 14 a semi-auto varmint/target rifle. At 5.56mm it's not really powerful enough for larger game, so I wouldn't consider it to be a hunting rifle.
Re: (Score:3)
An Assault Rifle [wikipedia.org] has a large capacity magazine (often >25 rounds) and an automatic and/or burst fire mode. Hunting rifles are either bolt action or semi-auto and usually have smaller magazine capacities (1-5) and are often chambered for larger calibers.
Bullshit arbitrary "classification".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:frist post (Score:5, Funny)
Last time I trusted a promise of cake, I got burned alive.
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I trusted a promise of cake, I got burned alive.
Did you receive grief counseling?
Re: (Score:2)
By your logic, a car is not designed to move people from one location to another.
Re: (Score:2)
You know we have a saying that says "Don't take _candy_ from a stranger".
Re: (Score:2)
Cake or Death! [youtube.com]
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obesity kills far more humans than "rifles" ever will, and yet you see no artists blocking food emojis...
By that logic the only thing we should protest is heat death of the universe.
Oh, and on a note that seems related but really isn't since noone here is claiming the emoji will incite violence: You're not ever going to go to the wrong part of town and be forced to eat junk food until you die of obesity. Understand that point before you run around criticizing other people's logic.
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
It actually makes sense not to have such an emoji, because it creates a dilemma whether someone using such an emoji in a message is making a threat, and whether the company, becoming aware of such a threat, has a duty to do something about it.
Obesity kills far more humans than "rifles" ever will, and yet you see no artists blocking food emojis, and no companies worrying about what do to when someone posts a cake emoji.
Gotta love the logic surrounding this bullshit argument.
Boobs have never killed anybody, all that boobs have ever done is feed babies and put smiles on the lips of men all over the planet, the bigger and bouncier the boobs the bigger the smile. I say all of us slashdotters should unite and lobby Unicode for a set of boobs emojis in all cup-sizes...
Re: (Score:2)
O O B cup
(o)(o) C cup
( O ) ( O ) D cup
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why but...
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Re: (Score:2)
Uh...breast cancer?
Re: (Score:2)
Obesity kills far more humans than "rifles" ever will, and yet you see no artists blocking food emojis, and no companies worrying about what do to when someone posts a cake emoji.
As a 46YO, 5'11" and 350-pound white male, I'm not going to eat my cellphone because someone sends me a cake emoji. How stupid can you be?
Re: (Score:2)
My brother was killed by a cake you insensitive clod, and every time someone sends me a cake emoji I have a near emotional breakdown and retreat to my safe space.
Re: (Score:2)
My brother was killed by a cake you insensitive clod, and every time someone sends me a cake emoji I have a near emotional breakdown and retreat to my safe space.
I hate to break the bad news to you. Your brother committed suicide. He ate the "Chocolate Lover's Suicide Cake" in one sitting. No one in his right mind does that. Not even fat people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And nobody's gonna go shoot up a place with their phone because someone sent them a rifle emoji.
Most cellphones have cameras to take pictures and videos. People can shoot up a place, upload to Instagram or YouTube, and call it a day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, I wonder why people are more concerned about people who blow off limbs and pieces other people with things we invented and don't need outside of war, and people who make the personal choice to eat too much of something we literally cannot live with out and have shorter life spans because of it? Yeah man, people are so illogical.
Re: (Score:2)
Obesity kills far more humans than "rifles" ever will, and yet you see no artists blocking food emojis, and no companies worrying about what do to when someone posts a cake emoji.
That's because food has more uses other than causing obesity- for example, food can prevent starvation. People also make boneheaded arguments about how cars kill more people than guns, disregarding all the uses cars have other than just killing people in accidents. They can get you to work, to a hospital, to get food, etc. But a gun is useful for firing bullets, period. It's pretty easy to survive without one.
Re: (Score:2)
Dumbass school administrative types don't have mindlessly applied "zero tolerance" policies about fat people or the foods that they eat. Meanwhile, that same bunch of halfwits suspend students if, in the process of eating a pop tart, he bites it into an "L" shape that might, by some stretch of the imagination, vaguely be a similar shape to a gun.
I have no trouble at all imagining a situation where some twat of a principal confiscates a student's phone on a whim, demands under various threats that it be unl
Re:frist post (Score:5, Insightful)
In simpler terms: Apple saved us a bunch of bullshit like a student being expelled over a rifle emoji.
Here's a fun fact about emoji: Emoji are artistically re-rendered usually per the brand of the device, resulting in different interpretations of how they're used vs. how they're intended. This has already landed people in hot water. There's an emoji of a someone laughing so hard they're in tears. There are quite a few people out there that see it as someone hysterically crying. On their device it may actually appear that way because of how the artist designed it. Imagine that little misinterpretation happening during a comment made about the recent shooting in Orlando!
All I'm going to say is: Thank you, Apple.
Re: (Score:3)
In simpler terms: Apple saved us a bunch of bullshit like a student being expelled over a rifle emoji.
Too late- a 12 year old girl posted a gun emoji on Instagram and was charged with making terroristic threats against her school. [washingtonpost.com]
Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately?) Slashdot doesn't render emojis correctly, but here's a quote from the article:
A grand jury in New York City recently had to decide whether ðY'® ðY" represented a true threat to police officers. A Michigan judge was asked to interpret the meaning of a face with a tongue sticking out: :P. Emoji even took a turn in the Supreme Court last year in a high-profile case over what constitutes a threat.
Re: (Score:3)
Pardon?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
a dilemma whether someone using such an emoji in a message is making a threat,
no.
Context. If I put a rifle emoji next to the shit emoji, I clearly want to shoot the shit. If I put it next to the cow emoji, I want a steak dinner.
If I say "murder" in actual letters, it's unclear what my intent is. If I say "murder you", possibly I am making a threat, except in this case I put it in quotes as part of a sentence that changes it's meaning from a threat to an explanation.
The only things that may be confused are
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
or maybe the laws that make such assumptions about 'threatening' online posting are what's broken.
Re: (Score:2)
> because it creates a dilemma whether someone using such an emoji in a message is making a threat
No, no it doesnt.
yet they support... (Score:2)
the fits emoji and knife emoji to help perpetuate violence... Look at their keynote... they use emoji signifying a desire to punch hindi people!
Who knew newspeak would start with Emojis (Score:3, Funny)
The destruction of words is a beautiful thing comrade Cook. This years unicode has 100 fewer symbols than 2015 it's doubleplusgood.
Overreaction? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone who implements emoji end up designing their own... it has to be a rifle if thats the spec but Googles drawing might differ from apple's or facebooks or microsofts. Any one of them might render it as an assault rife or a musket or some other thing that falls into the category of "rifle"
When codepoints are outlawed... (Score:4, Insightful)
...only outlaws will have codepoints.
Okay, and anybody who understands how to look things up in a character set.
Isn't there already a gun emoji? (Score:5, Informative)
There's already a gun emoji. Windows sidesteps the issue a bit by displaying it a cartoon raygun:
http://emojipedia.org/microsof... [emojipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Well as long as the emoji's ammo capacity is limited, it should be safe enough....
Re:Isn't there already a gun emoji? (Score:4, Funny)
Right. No assault emojis.
Where's was the NRA to protect us (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I feel my e-2nd amendment rights have been trampled.
One more reason to hate Apple (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? The only part of the whole thing that made me like Apple slightly less was when they first started SUPPORTING emojis in the OS and made a big deal about it as a "new feature" worth upgrading for.
As far as I'm concerned, emojis are generally just an annoyance. Reminds me of back in the BBS era where people could make flashing colored ANSI text and animated twirling cursors moving around and backspacing things that were on the screen.
If you feel the need to send images to someone, great. Send a ph
So what was it meant to be used for?!? (Score:2)
Really? "I feel like shooting something"? If you do then fucking _type_it_ instead of inserting a graphical symbol no one knows what it is supposed to represent and may look strange on the recipient(s) machine(s).
So when should we expect the "I stubbed my toe and want to comfort myself with chocolate ice-cream with opium topping to be washed down with vodka" emoji to appear?
Hopefully... (Score:3)
...this will prevent further mass shootings in chat rooms.
What about the others? (Score:3)
How do we get rid of the rest of the emoji?
Better get rid of the condom emoji (Score:2)
Walkie-Talkies! (Score:2)
Pretty please (Score:2)
May we have a politician-being-bribed emoticon?
Re: (Score:2)
There are emoji with different skin tones, they were added a while ago... That the author/editor of the article went with only white ones might say something about them but not about emoji in general.
Re: (Score:2)
Cars kill more people then guns yet we don't "ban" the pictograph of cars.
To be fair, cars don't kill people either. Whether it be guns, cars, or ham sandwiches, people are to blame for their accidental or intentional misuse that leads to the injury or demise of others. As long as we keep blaming inanimate objects for the damage caused, we will get NO WHERE. Gun deaths have been on a downward trend since the 70's, yet more guns are out there than ever, and many states have allowed concealed/open carry. Clearly, the lower number of deaths has nothing to do with removing guns from
Re: (Score:2)