When does AI start being smarter than us? Can't wait.
A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
141–150 of 461 posts
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#142I am surprised international chess organizations haven't denounced racism and announced the plan to change "white" and "black" to "A" and "B".
"A" and "B" would imply that English is superior to other languages. It also implies hierarchy since "A" comes before "B". Chess is sexist because the game ends when the King dies. I say we should ban Chess. Cheers.
In order to enforce social justice you want a group of activists to impose restrictions and police other groups of people? How would they convince those people to give up their freedom?
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Everything must be examined critically through the lenses of social justice. Chess is a Eurocentric and thus colonial game only valued because of its expression of whiteness. Dominance of an opponent of another color reenforces normative racism and the white pieces going first internalizes white supremacy to Black, brown, and indigenous peoples. I won’t even go into the obvious sexism and misogyny of the emotiona…
Ugh, I'm so screwed up. Your comment would be taken as dead serious in some circles and as parody in others. Based on the HN demographic I'm guessing the latter but I'm not sure.
I hate to do this because the parent is good at letting their dry humor speak for itself.
But yes, it's parody.
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#144What a fine mess we've created. - Popular experiences tend to be better experiences, so we all congregate to the same services - Homogenous user behavior leads to monopolistic situations, increasing outrage when anything goes wrong - Even if the government doesn't try to enforce moderation, the company attempts to self-moderate to maintain its image - The popularity of the service makes human moderation impossible, c…
[deleted]
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#145Agadmator, the person who made the video in question, also made a video soon after explaining the situation, and gave some hypotheses on why the video got taken down. In addition to the reason being hate speech, he suggested it may have been because they discussed Covid-19, lockdowns, etc, and YouTube was attempting to stop the spread of misinformation.
The video I’m talking about is here: https://youtu.be/KSjrYWPxsG8
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#146Let me off this euphemism treadmill! Please, I'm getting ill.
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought of this and realized it'd actually be a fun game. Both players write down their next move and then move simultaneously once both are ready. To avoid race conditions, if a player moves a piece that is to be taken by the opponent's move, then that player has saved that piece with that move. That creates an interesting dynamic where you may not wish to take the most valuable piece if you predict the other play…
How would two pieces moving to the same square be resolved? Both lost, or ... ? Regardless of the specifics, it would create a very complicated (but potentially interesting) dynamic when moving any valuable piece within a contested region.
[deleted]
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#148This reminds me of a story from a previous era of automated content moderation... When I was a student at the University of Cincinnati, I was a member of a group called LARC which stood for Laboratory for Recreational Computing. The main purpose of LARC was to get the University of Cincinnati to subsidize our yearly trip to DEFCON, but I digress. The UC mail servers, or at least the ones where the LARC mailing list w…
The clbuttic mistake.
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#149Artificial Unintelligence.
Re: A YouTube chat about chess got flagged for hate speech
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
> using language that upsets people is bad Shouldn't be. Intent should be the grounds for upset, intent only. Otherwise you get a Euphemism Treadmill, and that's a goddamn fucking waste of time.
This would save so much time wasting. When someone says "Can you push that to the master branch" there is nothing that ties that statement to slavery or racism so there is nothing wrong with it.
> there is nothing that ties that statement to slavery
I would say there is. That's where the language comes from. BUT I do not think that necessarily means that this is a callback or reference to enslaved _people_. Master/slave model accurately describes the model in a way that people can hear the terminology and understand what is happening without knowing details. It doesn't condone/promote slavery, it doesn't have anything to do with enslaving people, and in no way does it even encourage such behavior.
Context matters, a lot. And to be honest I didn't hear anyone complaining about this (and I live in an extremely liberal place), so it came off (to me) as a grab for social currency (_especially_ since GitHub didn't use the term "slave". GitHub was using "master" in the sense of "main" or "principle" and so I didn't get even understand). If you try hard enough you can make anything reference race, but at the end of the day what really matters is context and how people perceive things. If no one (or realistically few people, because there are people looking to make issues) are making these connections AND no one is being harmed, then we shouldn't really be worried about it.
Edit: wanted to make clearer that I'm talking about two different terms of the usage "master". One from master/slave model[0] and one that GitHub uses (which uses the adjective version of the word which means "main" or "principle"). And that the GitHub version does not reference the former version. I know we're talking contentious subjects here but I'm trying my best to convey what is in my head. I'm open to new opinions but bear with me. Language is complicated.