Recommended Posts

What about the 1st Amendment? Can a judge overrule it? Cause to me it seems like a case of individual censorship. But then it's group rights vs individual and the interests of majority win.

And I do too believe that he should have been just banned from entering those premises, instead of being silenced to pronounce a harmless word.

What about the 1st Amendment? Can a judge overule it? Cause to me it seems like a case of individual censorship. But then it's group rights vs individual and the interests of majority win.

And I do too believe that he should have been just banned from entering those premises, instead of being silenced to pronounce a harmless word.

What about the 1st ammendment? The judge didn't appear to overrule it.

Freedom of speech does not equal the ability to say anything you want, anywhere you want.

What about the 1st ammendment? The judge didn't appear to overrule it.

Freedom of speech does not equal the ability to say anything you want, anywhere you want.

The kid has been forbidden from expressing himself anywhere, I assume, including his own room. That's a bit overkill. What if he just likes the sound of the word?

It's the obligation of that local bingo to arrange a safe and fair environment for their participants. What have they done to prevent such a thing from happening if they are involved in serious business (like gambling) there? Nothing. No face-, age-, ID- control, no sound-proof walls.

:D

The kid has been forbidden from expressing himself anywhere, I assume, including his own room. That's a bit overkill. What if he just likes the sound of the word?

It's the obligation of that local bingo to arrange a safe and fair environment for their participants. What have they done to prevent such a thing from happening if they are involved in serious business (like gambling) there? Nothing. No face-, age-, ID- control, no sound-proof walls.

:D

lmao - so according to you it would be a cinema's fault for not arranging a safe and fair environment if someone decided to go into a crowded cinema and start shouting fire?

mmm.... not so sure you understand the concept of the first ammendment.

lmao - so according to you it would be a cinema's fault for not arranging a safe and fair environment if someone decided to go into a crowded cinema and start shouting fire?

mmm.... not so sure you understand the concept of the first ammendment.

imho it's not the same thing.

Shouting "fire" causes panic. Shouting "bingo" doesn't cause panic.

p.s. As for the cinema, if someone disturbs my movie watching session and the administration does nothing about it, I demand a refund.

  • Like 1

It might have gone down as just a harmless (if annoying) prank. But unfortunately for Whaley, Park Hills Police Sgt. Richard Webster was working off-duty security detail at the time (must be some high rollers at this bingo hall).

Really good use of tax payers money.

When i was young the police had better things to do.

We should start a trend like that harlem shake thing that's going around, no bingo halls will be safe :D

Man that would be awesome.

p.s. As for the cinema, if someone disturbs my movie watching session and the administration does nothing about it, I demand a refund.

Me too. But it looks like she should call the police instead. Anyway according to this police officer ...

I can understand banning the use of a word in a courtroom, but preventing someone from using a word with the threat of jail time is unfair. The kid should have simply been banned from the bingo hall.

  • Like 2

imho it's not the same thing.

Shouting "fire" causes panic. Shouting "bingo" doesn't cause panic.

You mustn't have been to a bingo hall filled with old ladies lately then :rofl:

Freedom of speech doesn't just mean you are not allowed to say something if it will cause panic. Go into a predominently black ghetto neighbourhood and start shouting n*****. If you get out alive, you can and should be charged with disorderly conduct (and possibly inciting a riot amongst others, although that doesn't apparently apply to Jesse Jackson for some reason but that's a whole other topic).

You mustn't have been to a bingo hall filled with old ladies lately then :rofl:

Freedom of speech doesn't just mean you are not allowed to say something if it will cause panic. Go into a predominently black ghetto neighbourhood and start shouting n*****. If you get out alive, you can and should be charged with disorderly conduct (and possibly inciting a riot amongst others, although that doesn't apparently apply to Jesse Jackson for some reason but that's a whole other topic).

Again, it's a bad comparison.

Shouting "bingo" is harmless, it doesn't ignite riots or hate. It doesn't offend anyone.

Don't think you quite understand the concept of freedom of speech...

lmao - so according to you it would be a cinema's fault for not arranging a safe and fair environment if someone decided to go into a crowded cinema and start shouting fire?

mmm.... not so sure you understand the concept of the first ammendment.

Do you understand? It would seem not.

Screaming fire in a theatre isn't a form of protected speech. Or screaming "I have a gun and I am going to shoot everyone in here" or "I planted a bomb under everyone's table and you all have 30 seconds before they detonate". Libel or slander aren't protected speech. Incitement is another one.

What he kid did was obnoxious and annoying but to argue it would have resulted in the same kind of panic, riot or chaos as those examples mentioned above is absurd. He should have been fined or warned and that should have been the end of it. Banning the kid from saying bingo is as about as stupid as it gets.

bahaha! Crazy that a judge has banned him from exercising his freedom of speech. He could just ban him from going to bingo clubs instead. Sending him to jail if he does it again is crazy.

Then he would have called the bingo hall and shouted Bingo on the phone! duh!

bahaha! Crazy that a judge has banned him from exercising his freedom of speech. He could just ban him from going to bingo clubs instead. Sending him to jail if he does it again is crazy.

Then he would have called the bingo hall and shouted Bingo on the phone! duh!

Come on you guys, the punishment here boils down to saying "don't do it again."

The punishment amounts to him being banned from saying a word. Which violates his constitutional right to freedom of speech.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Google reshuffles its AI coding team as it struggles to catch Anthropic by Karthik Mudaliar Google is already reorganizing the AI coding “strike team” it created roughly two months ago, as it attempts to find ways to close the gap with Anthropic in one of generative AI’s most commercially important areas. According to The Information, Google DeepMind is expanding the team’s focus to include “midtraining,” rather than concentrating only on coding tools and agents. Midtraining takes place after a model’s broad initial training but before the final stages that prepare it to follow instructions and perform specific tasks. In simple terms, it gives developers another opportunity to expose a model to carefully selected data before it is polished for release. That could help Google improve Gemini’s underlying coding abilities instead of relying only on better prompts, interfaces, or post-training. Previous research has found that midtraining can be particularly effective for code and mathematics, where models must move from general language knowledge to more structured tasks. Google reportedly created the original strike team in April. It was led by Google DeepMind research engineer Sebastian Borgeaud, who previously worked on model pretraining, and focused on complex, long-running programming jobs. Google co-founder Sergey Brin and Google DeepMind chief technology officer Koray Kavukcuoglu were also reportedly involved in the effort. DeepMind researchers were said to believe that Anthropic’s coding tools were outperforming Google’s Gemini models, prompting the company to give the project more attention. Anthropic has made coding a central part of its AI strategy through Claude Code and its Claude model family. The company has continued improving that area, with Claude Opus 4.8 offering upgrades for coding and other agentic tasks, along with the now-unavailable Mythos and Fable models. The reshuffle also comes at a time when Google faces increased competition for AI researchers. Gemini co-lead Noam Shazeer recently announced that he was leaving Google for OpenAI, while two other researchers who contributed to Gemini and DeepMind projects are reportedly preparing to join Anthropic. It remains unclear whether the reorganized team will produce a new public Gemini model or developer product. No release date, team size, or specific performance target has been disclosed. Source: The Information
    • Just remember - Microsoft is a trillion dollar company. They didn't have to raise the price this high. They chose to.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      413
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      168
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      132
    4. 4
      Xenon
      73
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!