Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Thanks To Apple's Influence, You're Not Getting A Rifle Emoji (buzzfeed.com)

Posted by msmash on from the for-culture dept.

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.

4 of 569 comments (clear)

  1. Re:frist post by mark-t · · Score: 2, Interesting
    True... but shootings kill more people than force feeding another person does.

    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.

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
  2. Re:frist post by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    He had a firearm, not a death ray.

    The shooter had a weapon of mass destruction, designed to kill people as efficiently as possible..

  3. Re:frist post by ooloorie · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If you look at the total number of mass shootings, you will see that they happen with much greater, and I mean MUCH greater frequency in the United States.

    Of course they happen with much greater frequency in the US; the US is much, much bigger too.

    If you'd like, I can post citations to back up my claim that John Lott's statistics are completely bogus.

    You have shown time and again that you are incapable of distinguishing truth from fiction, so frankly, I wouldn't even bother following your links.

    http://www.politifact.com/trut...

  4. Re:frist post by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    People buy these because it's cheaper to buy one gun and change parts out for a few different needs

    Like adding a drum magazine when you want to go shoot stop signs or murder 50 people.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.