SnoopSqueak

Mentally ill people are not fucking around. They are also not finding out because they don’t always understand what they did or why others reacted,

Good point. Ideally, we would not have such a mental illness epidemic in the first place, and some people blur the line between “mentally ill” and “creep”, but in the interests of not harming the innocent we should be cautious to exercise undue force.

They just need help. Actually i think you might be one of those people.

My christian parents have been hitting me since before I could think. I am seeking help, but I live in the US. Everything’s slow and the therapists have not been good. I’m trying a fifth one in a week or so.

My kids have like all kids acted inappropriately in public at times, and i don’t want to know how you would respond to it if they accidentally invaded your personal space in the process.

At young ages, that is typical. They are still developing, learning boundaries. I do not advocate hitting children. Assuming the old man was not mentally ill, he should have known better.

Yeah. I realize I can be intense sometimes, but I think it’s very important to advocate for those who can’t advocate for themselves. My autonomy was violently disregarded by my parents. I want to protect others because no one protected me. I don’t know the best way to do that, so I try to use what I’ve got. What I’ve got is a broken foundation and a lot of anger, fear, and pain. It’s easy to lash out, though probably not the most effective way of getting through to people.

Thanks for caring.

I pity your children.

The golden rule covers this.

Put yourself in the girl’s shoes. I would rather not be touched by random strangers. I hate the fact that stupid, selfish internet people have normalized my lack of autonomy. I hate you for being a coward while feigning moral superiority.

Are you going to condone violence just because violence was done to you?

Literally yes, it’s called defense. Would you let yourself be killed instead of fighting back? The old man was the aggressor. It would be wrong to let him act that way with no consequences. I care more about victims than their abusers, personally. If you choose not to fight at all, you’re choosing to help the abusers.

I think the point stands even if we ignore this specific incident: If you touch someone in public without their consent, especially a child, you can and probably should be harmed in retaliation. Boundaries and consent are essential. Fuck around, find out.

My parents hit me before I could think. Instead of stopping them, you’re defending their mindset.

Fuck you. Children are people.

Personally i think that son should realise dad is at a stage where they should not go outside on their own

I’m not sure son gives a shit about his father or the victim, too many dollar signs in his eyes as he seeks “justice”.

The old man was in the wrong, and he was a victim of violence.

The old man was in the wrong and didn’t learn shit. He was not a victim. He made an unacceptable choice.

When your kids are the ones being touched, I hope you tell them the truth: that you personally encouraged their abusers.

Can you explain what you meant by “especially thier heads”? Where is it acceptable for a child to be touched without their consent, according to you?

People are normalizing child abuse. It’s a huge problem.

But at least these parents understand after the fact that they could responded better.

And the old man and every other pervert have been encouraged to offend again. Really fucked up that you’re not getting this. The old man did something wrong and harmful, and now is pretending to be the victim.

But now the message is, “old people can touch whoever they want and you’ll be punished for stopping them.”

Earlier, Yeo told Singapore news outlet Channel News Asia that he had patted the little girl’s head because she “was very adorable”.

Stupid, shallow, selfish.

“Old people like to pat young children’s heads,” he said.

That does not make it okay. What the actual fuck?

He added that he started hurting hours after the fall, and that he was taking paracetamol for his pain.

I feel zero sympathy, dude should not have touched a child.

In another post, the elderly man’s son thanked the police for responding to the matter quickly, adding that he sincerely hoped “justice will be served for my father”.

Justice was almost served, but apparently he didn’t get his ass kicked hard enough.

The father should not apologize, the old man should. He got off lucky.

I was abused, so it is a bit of a sore subject. It has been normalized. We need to reverse that. Children are human beings. Old men do not have the right to touch them. It’s alarming that so many people are getting this backwards. Think a bit more, please.

Really? You can’t think of anywhere else that would be worse?

The head is relatively tame, but the point is that he violated her personal space, her boundaries, without asking. He treated her like an object for his appreciation. Do you think young children should be okay with strange old men touching them? Do you think their parents should be okay with that? I don’t. I can’t say whether their choice was the best one, but I am absolutely glad they did something about it.

I don’t think the head pat is a message that the child is his property.

What does the child think?

What type of “retribution” do you think is deserved here?

Hard to say. It’s partly why I wonder what they said to each other.

It’s crazy that you would even use that word.

It’s crazy that you’re trying to normalize child abuse.

Retribution is defined as punishment inflicted as vengeance.

Correct. Do you know why? Because the damage was already done. He did not ask before touching, he touched someone else’s child. No one can undo that. We could ask him politely not to do it again, but would that deter him and others like him? No. Show them what happens when they choose to casually violate the boundaries of others.

Why are you more interested in defending the aggressor than the victims?

What do we know?

A video of the incident shows the elderly man patting the child on the head as he walked past her table at a food court in a shopping centre.

A woman seated at the same table, believed to be the girl’s mother, immediately stopped him. Another man believed to be the father, walking back to the table, confronted the elderly man.

After what appeared to be a heated exchange, the younger man was seen grabbing the elderly man’s arm and throwing him to the ground.

Seemingly, a strange man violated a child’s personal space without her consent. What message does it send the child? “You are property for others to touch when they please?” Yes, that probably deserves retribution. People should know that this behavior is unacceptable. I wonder what words were exchanged.

I just wanted to play damn game. On my damn computer. But no, I got a bug to deal with and first spotted comment is from some unhinged dev.

We don’t see enough in the screenshot to feel your outrage. If you mentioned wanting to play a game, it seems reasonable for them to ask for clarification whether your computer is completely unusable or has some functionality.

I don’t think they were trying to correct you, I think they were trying to help you troubleshoot by getting more details about the issue. I could be wrong.

How do you think I feel and how willing I to provide any help with debugging?

I understand the disappointment and frustration. Unfortunately, no one can diagnose your problems from a distance without your cooperation.

I hope you are able to resolve the problem and enjoy your game. I’ve lost my shit for less, and it can be easy to lash out, even at people who are genuinely trying to help us.

Yes, Anthropic presumably submitted a request to block search results that lead to Claude chats, as well as to remove the ones that were already there. Google’s removal tool can remove results that had been indexed, and the “noindex” meta tag prevents future indexing, if I’m understanding correctly.

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9689846?hl=en

does google still has the URLs that it has already scraped?

My guess would be yes. I doubt the removal tool actually deletes content, more likely it just deactivates it. It could theoretically be reactived or used for something else, possibly even inbreeding (AI chat logs to train AI on) or selling data to whoever pays for it. But that is just a guess, I could be wrong. I don’t have much optimism when it comes to corporations, they tend to be as evil as they can get away with. If they legally acquired the content from those links because Anthropic neglected to protect them, there may not be many limits to what Google can do with those chat logs.

Claude fucked up, and gave Google a way to index public links of people.

Anthropic fucked up, Claude is not a person.

After this news broke, they asked Google (and other search engines) to not show those urls anymore.

Correct, that seems to be the case.

People fucked up and/or fell victim to Google’s the data hunger, which let Google to index their public links

Kind of. The user fuck up would be not realizing that Anthropic had no protections from search engines, and that by clicking “share” they were creating publicly accessible links.

after which Claude asked Google not to index such links.

Anthropic seems to have updated the domain those links are generated on so that crawlers do not index public chats, yes.

I guess, in the end, I’m mostly wondering if the long random strings of public links are generally “brute-force-discovered” by crawlers like Google, or whether “discovery” of such links requires some kind of breach.

I am also curious. I looked it up. https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/how-search-works

The first stage is finding out what pages exist on the web. There isn’t a central registry of all web pages, so Google must constantly look for new and updated pages and add them to its list of known pages. This process is called “URL discovery”. Some pages are known because Google has already visited them. Other pages are discovered when Google extracts a link from a known page to a new page: for example, a hub page, such as a category page, links to a new blog post.

If I had to guess based on this, Google had probably indexed the domain Claude or its frontend run on and automatically scooped up the public chats as they became available.

It is also possible that any Claude chat shared will still be accessible to web crawlers, if they just ignore the flags telling them not to scrape, crawl, access, index, etc.

I just want to avoid reinforcing their harmful delusions. The revolting truth is that people don’t need demons to act evil. But they throw around labels like “demon” and “sinner” to dehumanize people they don’t understand. The mythology gives them permission to be abusers.