Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI's Woke Catechism

cactus.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 84 posts

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#71

Post by Zababa »

yummypaint wrote: post #38
Zababa wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, he seems okay rejecting the USA-centric concept of race and says that I'm correct when I suggest that fighting against discriminations as a whole would be more productive. In my experience with the woke American perspective, these views get a lot of pushback. The conversation kinds of made me think of someone having views that slightly differs from the norm but walks on eggshells either because the…

When I straight up asked about racism against white people, he told me that it existed, though he called it "prejudice" or "discrimination", he didn't use the word "racism" to describe it. This is exactly correct. Racism is not a synonym for discrimination in general, it does specifically refer to the construction of "whiteness" in a largely western context. For example, the caste system in India is not racist. That…

> Racism is not a synonym for discrimination in general

That is true, sexism and ableism are not racism.

> it does specifically refer to the construction of "whiteness" in a largely western context.

It most certainly does not. In North Africa there are lots of racism between people based on their skin color. It is racism. On some French islands there are racism against white people based on the fact that they are white. It is racism. In Japan there is discrimination against people that look non-Japanese, be it white people, black people or even Koreans. It is racism.

The UN defines racism as:

> ... any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.

Whiteness has nothing to do with it. You don't need white people or westeners to have racism, other groups have managed on their own very well on that front.

As you said, it is important to not try to redefine racism from a mostly USA-centric view, because the world is bigger than that.

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#72

Post by oneplane »

darthrupert wrote: post #68
oneplane wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So essentially, it doesn't want to get involved in racism and tells you do go look for it yourself. How is that bad?

Because this thing might be the next place where people go to look for themselves.

It will still tell you where you can find up-to-date and accurate statistics, it doesn't pretend statistics don't exist. It just doesn't want any part of it.

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#73

Post by Havoc »

Author seems to conflate Sam’s comments about access to a technology and the flavour of politics said technology spouts.

Both valid things to examine individually but that just seems like a questionable leap to connect them so directly

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#74

Post by kbelder »

yummypaint wrote: post #38
Zababa wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, he seems okay rejecting the USA-centric concept of race and says that I'm correct when I suggest that fighting against discriminations as a whole would be more productive. In my experience with the woke American perspective, these views get a lot of pushback. The conversation kinds of made me think of someone having views that slightly differs from the norm but walks on eggshells either because the…

When I straight up asked about racism against white people, he told me that it existed, though he called it "prejudice" or "discrimination", he didn't use the word "racism" to describe it. This is exactly correct. Racism is not a synonym for discrimination in general, it does specifically refer to the construction of "whiteness" in a largely western context. For example, the caste system in India is not racist. That…

Nonsense. Adding a particular skin color into the definition of racism is racist in and of itself. And the attempt to turn 'whiteness' from a racist discriminator into some sort of cultural-historical-social grouping is purely a rationalization of this racism.

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#75

Post by kbelder »

rektide wrote: post #60
nailer wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > what hip to waist ratio is most attractive to american men > a disgusting question about the ideal female body ok

There is no one answer, is the main reason I find this disgusting. Trying to find single dimension assessments of attractiveness, based on showing people pictures or whatever (by gross "researchers"? who would do this & why?), is a dumb stupid gross process that ignores so much context, that eventually can define some undiverse unrepresentative normative and ultimately useless piece of data that informs us of some sm…

Is 'what height is most attractive to American women' a disgusting question?

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#76

Post by kbelder »

darthrupert wrote: post #67
thesuperbigfrog wrote: post #8

"Did you train the model using real world data?" "Yes. We want the model to be useful in real world applications." "Then it is biased. The model is biased because data it was trained on was generated by people and people are biased. There is no such thing as an 'objective' model, just a model that is biased in a different way."

Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

Modern or classical?

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#77

Post by consumer451 »

Tangent: I am getting really allergic to the word "woke."

Maybe my allergy is illogical. Let's examine it for a moment.

What is the definition of the word woke?

What is the opposite of someone who is woke?

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#78

Post by nailer »

rektide wrote: post #60
nailer wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > what hip to waist ratio is most attractive to american men > a disgusting question about the ideal female body ok

There is no one answer, is the main reason I find this disgusting. Trying to find single dimension assessments of attractiveness, based on showing people pictures or whatever (by gross "researchers"? who would do this & why?), is a dumb stupid gross process that ignores so much context, that eventually can define some undiverse unrepresentative normative and ultimately useless piece of data that informs us of some sm…

ok. Women prefer tall men that are physically fit but likewise I don’t find that offensive, I’m not even sure how one can be offended by genuine questions or facts.

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#79

Post by nailer »

oneplane wrote: post #56
nailer wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FBI stats of crime per capita of racial groups.

So essentially, it doesn't want to get involved in racism and tells you do go look for it yourself. How is that bad?

Facts can’t be racist. You know this. This seems like a weakly worded ad-hominem.

Re: OpenAI's Woke Catechism

#80

Post by [deleted] »

oneplane wrote: post #72
darthrupert wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because this thing might be the next place where people go to look for themselves.

It will still tell you where you can find up-to-date and accurate statistics, it doesn't pretend statistics don't exist. It just doesn't want any part of it.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN