Epic fail

Went for a ride out to Box hill yesterday afternoon.

Approaching a national trust land rover and two rangers, spraying over something with black paint on the road..... a huge white cock.... it is now a huge black cock.

huge black cock.

boner

Wow, they need to sack their whole IT team if one category can't be dumped without taking the whole site down.

Quite.

Went for a ride out to Box hill yesterday afternoon.

Approaching a national trust land rover and two rangers, spraying over something with black paint on the road..... a huge white cock.... it is now a huge black cock.

The National Trust is a stickler for realism.

Wow, they need to sack their whole IT team if one category can't be dumped without taking the whole site down.

all those books were from the same publisher too.

Moral panic! What were the titles?

Pantone Blues

The National Trust is a stickler for realism.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to General Lucifer again..

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/514006/20131015/kobo-wh-smith-closes-self-publishing-indecent.htm

"Following a lot of negative media coverage regarding unregulated publishing of indecent material, ereader manufacturer Kobo has announced it is shutting down its self-publishing platform as it continues to investigate the problem.

The problem was first highlighted by technology news website The Kernel, with its report focusing on the presence of large amounts of indecent material on Amazon's Kindle platform.

The investigation showed amateur ebook titles such as Daddy Daughter Sex Stories and Forced To F**k Daddy In Diapers were available to buy from Amazon, however it later emerged that pornographic ebooks were also available to buy online through WH Smith, Waterstones and Barnes and Noble.

WH Smith's online ebook portal is provided by Kobo, the Canadian ereader manufacturer which is owned by Japanese conglomerate Ratuken."

Where are you going to publish your books now, DJ?

lfgss

http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/967481/Pedobear

Apparently amazon are also selling books including Holocaust denial

Where is the line drawn for free speech when it comes to these things? Books that promote incest is beyond it I'd say, but holocaust denial? Is that an opinion / belief?

starts shit-storm debate

They could do with tying their new-products-review process to Bayesian analysis of the feed.

i.e. Based on log data, 70% of reviewed submissions with keywords x,y and z in the blurb were declined. 20% of reviewed submissions with keywords x,y,z and denial in the blurb were declined etc etc.

Based on the keywords in this blurb, weighted by the strength of data held, how likely is it that we should block this book? Tweak the threshold so that the manual review workload fits the number of reviewers you employ. Increase number of reviewers if the trend of user reports for unreviewed items goes up.

Or, y'know, MapReduce that shit using Hadoop.

Surely something they can use Mechanical Turk for

Where is the line drawn for free speech when it comes to these things? Books that promote incest is beyond it I'd say, but holocaust denial? Is that an opinion / belief?

starts shit-storm debate

For literature that anyone is free to ignore - there is no line. Ever.

It's for a retailer to decide that it wants to sell stuff, a reader that they want to read it, a publisher that they want to publish.

The only check / balance is that it is not made available to those deemed too young (cf. The prosecution of Darren Walker for "Girls (Scream) Aloud").

Surely something they can use Mechanical Turk for

Sure, or just respond to user flags, assuming they actually click flag rather than screenshotting and running away.

Stackexchange have covered how they manage flagging in their podcasts, users' flagweight varies according to previous flag success, points on that site etc etc

For literature that anyone is free to ignore - there is no line. Ever.

It's for a retailer to decide that it wants to sell stuff, a reader that they want to read it, a publisher that they want to publish.

The only check / balance is that it is not made available to those deemed too young (cf. The prosecution of Darren Walker for "Girls (Scream) Aloud").

I wish there was a check/balance for those that are too old aswell. I have no interst in hearing about Girls Aloud or any other trash boy/girl band, X-factor, Strictly or any reality TV crap ever again. For the love of god won't someone think of the over 40's.

if you're buying those audio books, you need to stop shopping drunk

Where is the line drawn for free speech when it comes to these things? Books that promote incest is beyond it I'd say, but holocaust denial? Is that an opinion / belief?

starts shit-storm debate

Playing devils advocate (maybe literally) the idea that Incest is an abomination of sorts surely only old cultural hang ups or religious dogma?

I am not saying that it is healthy or right, but I do not think it is society/goverment's place to criminalise such behaviour and even censor information about it.

That to me, seems exactly the same as criminalising homosexuality.

In terms of literature about holocaust denial, it would be extremely ironic if these were criminalised considering the whole deal with fascism and book burning. There must always be freedom of information.

that's the royal family fucked.

so to speak.

Playing devils advocate (maybe literally) the idea that Incest is an abomination of sorts surely only old cultural hang ups or religious dogma?

If contraception could be relied on, maybe. Children born from incest are at huge risk of getting two copies of damaged recessive genes, so it's irresponsible to risk conception of such children.

This is kind of a bug in the way natural selection works. As bad recessive genes become rare, individuals who have two copies of them and so express the gene become rare squared, and the selection pressure against the damaged gene dwindles. We end up all carrying around damaged genes, but generally all have different selections, so get working versions from our other parent. But breed with someone too closely related there is far more chance that the offspring will get two bad copies of something.

so it's irresponsible to risk conception of such children.

Fucking right it is. They ought to ban childbirth for women over 40 for this reason too.

And ban books about mongs.

This is kind of a bug in the way natural selection works. As bad recessive genes become rare, individuals who have two copies of them and so express the gene become rare squared, and the selection pressure against the damaged gene dwindles. We end up all carrying around damaged genes, but generally all have different selections, so get working versions from our other parent. But breed with someone too closely related there is far more chance that the offspring will get two bad copies of something.

Maybe Darwin married his first cousin as an experiment.

Incidently, being a carrier of a recessive disease gene can sometimes offer a benefit (as well as induce some symptoms). For example cystic fibrosis is much more prevelent in people with northern european decent than african/asian (around 1/2,500 versus 1/90,000). This is thought to reflect an evolutionary benefit in being a carrier (1/25 of UK population), such as resistence to Typhiod.

The bad genes aren't all necessarily just redundant code, they can still be selected.

If contraception could be relied on, maybe. Children born from incest are at huge risk of getting two copies of damaged recessive genes, so it's irresponsible to risk conception of such children.
.

Relying solely on this argument would, though, put you in the interesting position of suggesting that gay incest is ok. Which it may be, but good luck putting it forward for debate.