We are going to kill "unalive"

This argues that the rise of euphemisms like “unalive” - and coded references such as “r pe,” “grape,” or the 🍇 emoji - is not harmless slang but a direct consequence of algorithmic content moderation that trains an entire generation to self-censor. Platforms that distribute content through opaque recommendation algorithms punish plain words for death, sexual violence, genocide and other realities, so creators and everyday users adopt mangled syntax to avoid suppression. That behavioral change has become invisible to those who grew up with it, warping creativity, limiting political speech, and seeding biased training data for large AI systems; examples named include TikTok, Instagram, Google, and the hypocrisy of tech billionaires like Larry Ellison and Elon Musk who enable platform control while feigning commitment to free expression.

The prescription is practical and confrontational: stop preemptive self-censorship and start “saying what you mean,” diversify where you publish (email newsletters, independent blogs, alternative platforms), build alliances with artists and activists, and publicly call out and amplify instances of platform suppression. Test platform limits, publicize censorship, and use controversy to shift audiences off algorithmic playgrounds. The piece frames this as a cultural fight over language, artistic survival, and democracy, urging collective resistance to “kill ‘unalive’” before algorithms finish narrowing what people can imagine and say.