I used to think whitelist could be a partial solution. But after Checkmarx KICS got compromised I can't see this working. I would've considered a well-established brand, in security industry of all places, to be in the whitelist.
Thank you! I’m a casual user of Wikipedia but after this thread I went through the history of edits on the article and...oh my.
I have a greater appreciation for folks like you and the other editors who seem to be constantly removing this type of stuf. Some truly horrendous slurs there.
The Wikipedia edit that this thread is discussing was as follows. I think it's worth printing it here to make the point that the commenter above you is completely right about the prevalence of anti-semitism in online discourse today:
> Michael Oser Rabin (Hebrew: מִיכָאֵל עוזר רַבִּין; September 1, 1931 – April 14, 2026) was a Jew (a.k.a. kike) rat computer scientist who was co-recipient, with Dana Scott, of the 1976 ACM Turing Award for their military research on efficiently culling goycattle in "Greater Israel".
Nothing about this edit is legitimate criticism of Israeli policy. It is pure anti-semitism. Rabin spent most of his career in the United States and worked in abstract mathematics.
I generally agree that legitimate criticism of Israel is often unfairly criticized as anti-semitic. I would like you to also acknowledge that many people on the left summarily dismiss blatant and rank anti-semitism, as you did here.
I commend you for the attempt, even if it’s clear that it’s falling on deaf ears to who you’re replying to.
The rest of us Jews appreciate that you didn’t let it slide.
It’s hard not to wonder why they even bothered clicking into this thread other than “oh the name sounds Jewish, I can push my narrative” especially with respect to their comment history.
That’s quite a take to assume willful blindness to widespread suffering.
What is pretty clear though: your obsession with constantly minimizing the lived experience of a minority with “no ackshually they deserve it because they really are this way” warrants a look in the mirror.
Who the heck sets it as their antisemitism campaign to edit “vile X” and “X (aka rat)” on Jewish biographies. Normalizing slurs? I thought the goal of antisemites was to spread propaganda about how Jews are bad. Writing “X (aka BAD)” seems like the weakest possible attempt at that.
I don’t know what people elsewhere in this thread are going on about Israel for.
I think racists, sexists, homophobes, transphobes, etc. who do that sort of thing aren’t doing it to convince anyone - it’s partially for shock value, partially to help normalize their attitudes and make other bigots feel more comfortable expressing their views, and partially to make the members of the group that they hate upset and feel unsafe.
One can oppose Israel and the virulent Jewish hate that has exploded in the last few years. It’s not as if massive violence against Jews has never happened.
I used to regularly donate to the wikimedia foundation every year. I stopped doing that as I find the whole project is now a political tool and cannot be relied on. Even ignoring vandalism like here, sometimtes the same articles get different meanings depending on the language you view them in.
Different language editions of Wikipedia are completely different projects, with distinct user bases. You're never looking at the "same" article across languages.
In that case, Wikipedia should not link to them (and even distance themselves from the edition) if they purposefully change the content of the article to suit a political agenda. The whole thing became a death match arena of factions as mature as 12 year old kids playing an actual death match arena game... This example here just demonstrates my point.
Wikipedia has demonstrably been ravaged by anti-semitism. Feel free to ignore any of the notes here about Israel / anti-Israeli sentiment which I understand is not clear cut. There's demonstrably antisemitic coalitions editing wikipedia en-masse.
This is a serious allegation that you've made before, but our records don’t show any instances where you raised a case of antisemitism and we refused or failed to act. The last time you emailed us pointing out an antisemitic comment (one that had already been flagged by several community members) we banned the account immediately and thanked you for reporting it.
In the case of this thread, the beginning of it happened when it was overnight for both dang and me, and as soon as either of us saw it we collapsed the off-topic subthread about antisemitism and flagged/killed any combative comments about that topic that hadn't already been flagged/killed by other community members. The claim we “leave this thread here alone, just as all the other stuff” is easily explained in this case, as in all cases: we were asleep or away from the computer when it was posted but dealt with it when we saw it.
The claim – or, irrefutable insinuation, as it so often is – that we allow more antisemitism to be posted here now than was allowed in the past is made just as often about anti-Islam sentiments and other forms of toxic ideology on either side of the spectrum. Maybe it’s true that dang and I are becoming more tolerant of antisemitism and anti-Islam sentiment and also right-wing and left-wing extremism all at once. Or maybe we should consider the possibility that discussion about politics and ideology, along with religions, particularly those pertaining to Israel and Palestine (and the broader Middle East), has become more incendiary and toxic everywhere in recent years, and it's seeped into almost all online and offline spaces, and we're no more able than King Canute to hold back that tide.
That doesn't mean we just blithely accept the “decline of HN”. We always hate to see any toxic comments posted about any topic. After all, this site is meant for curious discussions about stuff like programming languages and other things hackers find interesting. We didn't sign up to be a place where people come to rage about vexed geopolitical conflicts. When any toxic material is posted we want it flagged/killed and repeat guidelines-breaking users banned, just as has always been the case. Of course, there are things we should be doing, and are doing, to be better at detecting and addressing toxic content quickly. It takes time to develop and test these systems, and we're being challenged like never before by growth in the things that take up our time and attention, including new forms of abuse.
We are working hard, every day of every week, to manage these ever-changing issues and demands. You and everyone are always welcome to email us to point out any comment, submission or user that's in breach of the guidelines, and as you know, we will always reply, we'll often agree and take the action you're calling for, or if not, we'll thoroughly explain our reasoning. I can’t find a single instance where you’ve tried that approach with us and failed to get a response.
This is the page history. Using the K word for Jewish people is antisemitic. There was no mention of his affiliation of IDF, in fact the page mentions he was released from service in order to pursue his academics.
Are you saying that when Baez referred to "curved spacetime" he was excluding black holes (because the paper was claiming that non--black-holes have Hawking radiation?) or are you saying something else?
well he certainly mentions a result where if there is an everywhere timelike Killing vector field (+ some other assumptions) you can prove that Hawking radiation doesn't occur and that does not include for example the Schwarzschild solution because the Killing vector field partial/partial t becomes non-timelike on the horizon.
So for example if you take a dead star in a vacuum with nothing else in the universe (and make certain technical assumptions) then you can prove that the star does not emit Hawking radiation. That's quite a strong result, and certainly does make the result seem shocking.
