``emoji'' aka FUCK UNICODE

How do we kill unicode?

I'm fucking done with it since:

😄😃😀😊☺😉😍😘😚😗😙😜😝😛😳😁😔😌😒😞😣
😢😂😭😪😥😰😅😓😩😫😨😱😠😡😤😖😆😋😷😎😴
😵😲😟😦😧😈👿😮😬😐😕😯😶😇😏😑👲👳👮👷💂
👶👦👧👨👩👴👵👱👼👸😺😸😻😽😼🙀😿😹😾👹👺
🙈🙉🙊💀👽💩🔥✨🌟💫💥💢💦💧💤💨👂👀👃👅👄
👍👎👌👊✊✌👋✋🖖👐👆👇👉👈🙌🙏☝👏💪🚶🏃💃
👫👪👬👭💏💑👯🙆🙅💁🙋💆💇💅👰🙎🙍🙇🎩👑👒
👟👞👡👠👢👕👔👚👗🎽👖👘👙💼👜👝👛👓🎀🌂💄
💛💙💜💚❤💔💗💓💕💖💞💘💌💋💍💎👤👥💬👣💭

🐶🐺🐱🐭🐹🐰🐸🐯🐨🐻🐷🐽🐮🐗🐵🐒🐴🐑🐘🐼🐧
🐦🐤🐥🐣🐔🐍🐢🐛🐝🐜🐞🐌🐙🐚🐠🐟🐬🐳🐋🐄🐏
🐀🐃🐅🐇🐉🐎🐐🐓🐕🐖🐁🐂🐲🐡🐊🐫🐪🐆🐈🐩🐾
💐🌸🌷🍀🌹🌻🌺🍁🍃🍂🌿🌾🍄🌵🌴🌲🌳🌰🌱🌼🌐
🌞🌝🌚🌑🌒🌓🌔🌕🌖🌗🌘🌜🌛🌙🌍🌎🌏🌋🌌🌠⭐
☀⛅☁⚡☔❄⛄🌀🌁🌈🌊

🎍💝🎎🎒🎓🎏🎆🎇🎐🎑🎃👻🎅🎄🎁🎋🎉🎊🎈🎌🔮
🎥📷📹📼💿📀💽💾💻📱☎📞📟📠📡📺📻🔊🔉🔈🔇
🔔🔕📢📣⏳⌛⏰⌚🔓🔒🔏🔐🔑🔎💡🔦🔆🔅🔌🔋🔍
🛁🛀🚿🚽🔧🔩🔨🚪🚬💣🔫🔪💊💉💰💴💵💷💶💳💸
📲📧📥📤✉📩📨📯📫📪📬📭📮📦📝📄📃📑📊📈📉
📜📋📅📆📇📁📂✂📌📎✒✏📏📐📕📗📘📙📓📔📒
📚📖🔖📛🔬🔭📰🎨🎬🎤🎧🎼🎵🎶🎹🎻🎺🎷🎸👾🎮
🃏🎴🀄🎲🎯🏈🏀⚽⚾🎾🎱🏉🎳⛳🚵🚴🏁🏇🏆🎿🏂
🏊🏄🎣☕🍵🍶🍼🍺🍻🍸🍹🍷🍴🍕🍔🍟🍗🍖🍝🍛🍤
🍱🍣🍥🍙🍘🍚🍜🍲🍢🍡🍳🍞🍩🍮🍦🍨🍧🎂🍰🍪🍫
🍬🍭🍯🍎🍏🍊🍋🍒🍇🍉🍓🍑🍈🍌🍐🍍🍠🍆🍅🌽

>>38
Oh G-d. Why did you let humanity fall into this.

Feels great writing ASCII-only software

Have they implemented the MAN SUCKING DICK character already?

>>38
F09FA1A8E2808DF09FA1A8E2808DF09FA1A6E2808DF09FA1A6

All this complexity in a fundamental standard, all for a feature that nobody is ever going to use.

Unicode more like Unichode.

>>38
http://www.unicode.org/emoji/charts/full-emoji-list.html

person-apple
person-android

They also define a custom ordering of emoji, right before arguing that nobody will ever actually need it. Yeah, this was written by Google and Apple alright. Somebody is trying to justify his paycheck.

I hope to G-d UC shoots this shit down.

👬⃠

https://i.imgur.com/pI14HVc.png

https://i.imgur.com/NpZmHLP.png

>>47-49
This is lovely.

Please refrain from using ``emoji'' faces on /prog/, as they are problematic.^[1]

[1]: http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/10/how-apples-new-multicultural-emojis-are-more-racist-than-before/

>>51
that was actually a really good read and I agree, apple should never have made race an issue with the emoji

Race is harmful. We should all be uniform and yellow, like raceless emoji.

>>53
Race is a social construct so there should NOT be any "race" - based imagery in unicode.

>>51

Paige Tutt is a writer who covers race
negro
covers race

Didn't read.

>>54
Race is biological reality, not a social construct.

>>55
social darwinism is also biological reality. But there is a human reality, where race is just a label to stereotype people.

>>56
Then why does the NBA almost exclusively consist of blacks? Why are all the running disciplines at the Olympics won by blacks? Is it because of "labels" or because blacks are biologically better adapted to running and playing basketball?

>>57
Intense training from childhood and dedication.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Johnson_%28sprinter%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Lemaitre

>>58
Yes, intense training and dedication, added to natural variance inside the race can allow some whites to match blacks' abilities. But that has no effect on the averages and does not make race any less of a reality. Race has impact on a lot more things than the color of the skin. For example, blacks also have, on average longer fingers than whites.

>>58

He was the first white man to break the 10-second barrier in an officially timed 100 m event.
2010

It must have been the social construct preventing white people from running, yeah, right.

>>54
Being a nigger is a social construct now? How can I become black?

>>55
man you're a fucking idiot.

>>57
you're replying to a parody account. We all know that different groups of people have different strengths.

>>61
It will involve lots of shoe polish, soot, hair twirls, a couple of buckets of chicken from KFC, and a record by 'Run Dee Em Cee'.

>>62
When did Admin-kike add accounts?

You people argue over such pointless things. It is the opinion of modern anthropology that race is a social construct. Do you, a bunch of shitposters, seriously think you know more about the topic than an anthropologist?

By the 1970s, it had become clear that (1) most human differences were cultural; (2) what was not cultural was principally polymorphic – that is to say, found in diverse groups of people at different frequencies; (3) what was not cultural or polymorphic was principally clinal – that is to say, gradually variable over geography; and (4) what was left – the component of human diversity that was not cultural, polymorphic, or clinal – was very small.

A consensus consequently developed among anthropologists and geneticists that race as the previous generation had known it – as largely discrete, geographically distinct, gene pools – did not exist.

>>65

modern anthropology

More like JEW-SPONSORED ANTHROPOLOGY

The report The Color of Crime (2005, second expanded edition) by the New Century Foundation states that while the official crime statistics show large racial differences in the United States, there are several problems which tend to cause underestimation of the racial differences. One example being "Whites" sometimes including Hispanics. Another is not adjusting for that the different racial groups differ in population size. The report reviews the more accurate statistics that is available and describes many large differences in crime rates between races. The report also examines the research on possible bias against racial minorities in the justice system and the police and concludes that bias not a significant explanation for the different racial crime rates.[3]

It major findings were stated as:[3]

Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
When Blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-Blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.
Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the White rate.
The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is Black and Hispanic.
Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving Blacks and Whites, Blacks commit 85 percent and Whites commit 15 percent.
Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are Black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When Whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are Black.
Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a White than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.
Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa.
Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white.
Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely.
Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million.
Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than Whites. Hispanics are three times more likely.

>>67
http://www.timwise.org/2004/11/race-crime-and-sloppy-social-science/

>>68
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPiAjl2LeMU

>>68
This one is by a white man, so I'll read it.

economic conditions explain the difference with white crime rates

This only means that blacks are more prone to being poor. Perhaps they choose a life of poverty in order to do crime all the time. Irrelevant to the question, at any rate.

when it comes to everyday threats to personal well-being, whites far and away lead the pack in all kinds of destructive behaviors: corporate pollution, consumer fraud, violations of health

Oh, so getting a diarrhea from polluted water or getting ripped off in a car deal are somehow worse threats than getting stabbed in the street or having your wife raped and performing an abortion as a result? This is just plain and misleading bullshit. Also, corporations and states are institutions, not people. They follow different decision-making procedures. Who's to say that the corporation polluting your town isn't black-owned? Then there are black factory workers and black soldiers killing people. By the way, black soldiers don't mean that blacks are more prone to kill people, but neither do white soldiers. It's a different process of making decisions and policies, a collective one rather than personal.

The next arguments from Tim Wise are self-contradictory:

meaning that whites were victimized by blacks less often than would have been expected by random chance, given the extent to which whites were available to be victimized
Because of ongoing racial isolation and de facto segregation, the two group’s members do not encounter one another at rates commensurate with their shares of the population

If there is racial isolation, then why are whites "more available" to be victimized? And vice versa, if whites are more widely available as victims, then what "racial isolation and de facto segregation" is he talking about? Bullshit.

the odds of a given white person (or white criminal for that matter) encountering a black person are only about three percent

More bullshit. With the modern diversity policies and "inclusion", blacks are everywhere, from offices to colleges to recreational spaces and all streets in all towns. The odds of meeting a black person simply cannot be as low as 3%, that would require all blacks to live in ghettoes and never leave them.

In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes

So if there are about 8 times more whites than blacks, why do whites commit only 2.5 more violent crimes? You can't bullshit us, Tim Wise: blacks are far more prone to commit violent crimes.

Criminologists estimate that seventy percent of all crimes are committed by just seven percent of the offenders (12): a small bunch of repeat offenders who commit the vast majority of crimes. Since blacks committed roughly 1.2 million violent crimes in 2002, if seventy percent of these were committed by seven percent of the black offenders

This is more diversity bullshit. If 70% of crimes are committed by 7% of offenders, that doesn't mean those 7% are evenly distributed by race. As follows from the data, blacks are several times more wont to commit violent crimes. Thus, those 7% might have all been black, which would mean that the rate of repeated offenders within the black population would be higher. Tim Wise makes nothing to account this possible inaccuracy.

this means that whites are 4.7 times more likely to be victimized by another white person than by a black person

Which is less than the 8:1 population ratio, thus supporting the fact that blacks are more prone to committing violent crimes than whites.

If, as the Justice Department data suggests, blacks commit somewhere between 25-30 percent of violent crime in most years (23 percent in 2002), to profile blacks for crime will result in police being wrong, between 70-75 percent of the time

Another nonsensical outburst from Tim Wise. Profiling blacks means focusing more efforts on them, not ignoring crimes committed by other racial groups. And seeing that the relative crime rates are higher among blacks (yes, 25-30 percent is higher than the 10-15 percent of the population they make up), profiling them would be definitely rational.

The sad fact is that racism already enjoys plenty of legitimacy

Ah, but this is a joyous fact! It means that not everyone is fooled by liberal tolerance propaganda. A lot of people still have their own heads on their shoulders, which is encouraging.

This thread is biological in nature, it has no place on /prog/.

>>71
You are biological in nature.

>>71
Emoji are not biological.

>>73
Emotion is biological. Emoji are symbols of emotion.

>>73
Races and humans are, and that's what is being discussed here.

>>72
Yes. Yet I do not post threads centered on me to /prog/, only to /lounge/. And you should do the same.

>>73
Emoji is an encoding.

Emoji are abstract representations of humans experiencing an emotion.

,_,
ᶘᵒᴥᵒᶅ Abstract Representation of Haskell

>>76-77
Emoticons

>>79

Wrong, emoticons are ASCII ;)