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

Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 1001 posts

Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

#111

Post by silicon2401 »

jedimastert wrote: post #78
kache_ wrote: post #22

I've been privy to people trying to ban words like "whitelabel" at my company. Thankfully, management & executives at my company never stood for that BS so I still get to use whitelist & blacklist in documentation, and don't worry about those non-issues get in the way of me actually doing work. Google might be too far gone, and working with those people would be so exhausting that it's actually stopped me from applyi…

Silly question: ignoring any kind of history, why fight for terms like "whitelist" and "blacklist" when terms like "allowlist" and "blocklist" are objectively clearer, especially for folks who's first language is not English?

Your question takes for granted that people are fighting for whitelist in blacklist, but it's the opposite. Whitelist and blacklist are long-established and familiar terms.

Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

#113

Post by reaperducer »

bombcar wrote: post #46
gdulli wrote: post #29

I spent many years in the bluest corner of a very blue state. But still I can't imagine any objection to the word "landlord" outside of (1) a right wing attempt to satirize the left, (2) a Google product brainstorming meeting, or (3) a rare sincere outlier or concern troll. In any of those cases I don't think this is necessary. That said, if the word "landlord" organically fell out of favor and out of usage to be rep…

Landlord gets hit from multiple sides; those who don't like that it contains "lord" which is a male term, those who don't like that landlords exist, and those who don't like that the concept of owning land exists.

it contains "lord" which is a male term

I didn't think of that. I always thought of it as "lording over" something. As in she's the "lord of the land."

That said, a landlord and a property owner are not the same thing. Many (most?) apartment buildings are owned by one company and managed by another.

Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

#114

Post by filoleg »

jedimastert wrote: post #78
kache_ wrote: post #22

I've been privy to people trying to ban words like "whitelabel" at my company. Thankfully, management & executives at my company never stood for that BS so I still get to use whitelist & blacklist in documentation, and don't worry about those non-issues get in the way of me actually doing work. Google might be too far gone, and working with those people would be so exhausting that it's actually stopped me from applyi…

Silly question: ignoring any kind of history, why fight for terms like "whitelist" and "blacklist" when terms like "allowlist" and "blocklist" are objectively clearer, especially for folks who's first language is not English?

I am fine with "blocklist" instead of "blacklist", because it sounds similar. But "allowlist" is just more difficult to pronounce.

Regarding your concern about people for whom English isn't the first language, I dont know how valid it is. Because those terms exist under the same names and fall under the same usage in many other languages. I can confirm that it is the case with Russian, as "черный список" is a commonly used phrase, and it literally translates to "black list", and has the exact same meaning as in English.

Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

#115

Post by dymk »

jedimastert wrote: post #78
kache_ wrote: post #22

I've been privy to people trying to ban words like "whitelabel" at my company. Thankfully, management & executives at my company never stood for that BS so I still get to use whitelist & blacklist in documentation, and don't worry about those non-issues get in the way of me actually doing work. Google might be too far gone, and working with those people would be so exhausting that it's actually stopped me from applyi…

Silly question: ignoring any kind of history, why fight for terms like "whitelist" and "blacklist" when terms like "allowlist" and "blocklist" are objectively clearer, especially for folks who's first language is not English?

That's not what the word "objectively" means

Whitelist and blacklist are the words we've been using for decades to describe a concept. Everybody knows what they mean.

Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

#116

Post by dekhn »

Kylekramer wrote: post #110
dekhn wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I'm confused why you think the vice authors live in a world where landlord is a slur. It's not. It's a commonly used term and a small number of progressive individuals have manipulated the media and their followers into thinking it's terrible. But it isn't. Hence, my request as to why you think the Vice authors "wanted to use a slur", since it isn't.

Cause I have worked in NYC media and know that Vice writers use "landlord" as an insult? The impetus for this piece was someone wrote a tweet that got very popular implying Google is somehow trying to cover for "landlords" by calling them "property owners". Vice writers are upset about that and would prefer to use "landlord" cause in their culture it has a negative connotation.

An insult and a slur are extremely different things.

Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

#117

Post by luxuryballs »

gorwell wrote: post #56
mgraczyk wrote: post #9

In the article they use the example of "Motherboard" and "Landlord" and seem to suggest that these are areas where the Google AI is making mistakes or being overly strict. As a Google employee expressing my own opinion and observations of company culture, I can say that these are 100% not mistakes. Many Google employees are just so out of touch with the real world that they believe it is the duty of Google Docs to ch…

I can't imagine most employees agree with this. Why aren't they pushing back?

Probably better to fly under the radar in most cases especially if they have recently been locked out of the office for not getting mRNA injections.

Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

#118

Post by tyingq »

darepublic wrote: post #50
kache_ wrote: post #22

I've been privy to people trying to ban words like "whitelabel" at my company. Thankfully, management & executives at my company never stood for that BS so I still get to use whitelist & blacklist in documentation, and don't worry about those non-issues get in the way of me actually doing work. Google might be too far gone, and working with those people would be so exhausting that it's actually stopped me from applyi…

Airbnb did a similar thing, var/schema name whitelabel was excised. Weirdly black label remained. It caused a frontend bug temporarily

"Black Label" has positive connotations. So it feels like an effort to find anything with "white" where there might be a positive connotation. And anything "black" where there might be a negative connotation. And to remove all that matches, regardless of why the specific connotation exists, why it exists, whether it's related to race in any way, etc.

I suppose that's easier than trying to debate every occurrence.

Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken

#119

Post by tgv »

cabirum wrote: post #75

"...language is of central importance to human thought because it structures and limits the ideas that individuals are capable of formulating and expressing."

That idea is also known as the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis, and despite many attempts, it has never been proven. There are only a few flawed papers that provide some support. We can safely assume it's untrue. Instead, it's (trivially) the other way around: our thinking shapes our language.
Post reply on HN