It’s no wonder they fired the AI ethics department if this is the output.
Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
121–130 of 1001 posts
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#122And now the rest of the world will be very happy learn that they will once more have to silently deal with the aftermath of America’s latest political trend. After banning world-famous paintings from Facebook because they dared show a breast, a few well-off engineers and product managers will now pick which English words should remain, and which should be let go. How nice of them. Don’t know what we’d do without them…
This SV culture is being exported to the rest of the world at an alarming pace.
https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-me...
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#123I have been thinking about this for a while, and came to the conclusion that the main weakness of progressivism is its arrogance. A progressive simply thinks that she is more educated, virtuous or simply better than others. This manifests subtly, from "helping poor immigrants", to not so subtle implementations, like knowing better what Google queries you actually meant to type, to censoring "fake news", because peopl…
You are lumping all progressive people together.
You also assume they are female.
Why?
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#124Since when is black and white primarily a racial thing anyways? It seems a little inverted, like a black flag or a black mark on an account, it’s not like it’s called “negrolist”, black and white are colors before they are slang for race/culture. Maybe instead of neutering the dictionary we could try a different angle and quit lumping people into “white” or “black”? Some people are Kenyan, Irish, Nigerian, German, no…
This is the hypocrisy of radical leftists in a nutshell. They claim to fight racial thinking while in fact just making it more prominent than it's been in decades.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#125I'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 think there's a good argument to keep terms to maintain the historical connection. There's a boatload of math and CS terms that are very, very poorly named, but if you renamed them, you lose the link to prior sources.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
This entire comment is a lie. Terms like "motherboard" are readily findable on Google's internal search. I could not find anything referencing a banned non-inclusive words policy in the employee policy guide. I have never heard of anything remotely resembling someone catching heat for saying "motherboard" or whatever. Source: I also work at Google.
Since you work at Google, maybe you can answer this: does internal tooling exist to flag occurrences of "bad" words in say, code reviews or shared documents?
[deleted]
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#127I'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?
Because the people/forces pushing them can’t be trusted.
Pushing such terms is (while presumably this is not the conscious intent) a means of cementing power by showing who (as in, “what vague coalition”, not “which specific people”) is in control.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#128One of the reasons I left google is that their "content moderation team" (the folks who make you take down wrongthink memes) is so far out of touch, that somebody had to explain to them there are people in the world who are discriminated against, but aren't black. They simply didn't know that was the case! And if that's the people who are moderating content... I said motherboard all the time in meetings and chats, ne…
Put yourself in the shoes of your average content moderator. Aren't they there for the paycheck like most people at their jobs? Why does everyone assume these people are first and foremost bastions of acceptable behaviour? They are instructed by executives as to how to do their jobs. Now executives are learning nuance and say "oh there's more to this than you thought, so here's the updated guidelines to follow now",…
Are other cases of online abuse, workplace harassment, discrimination, etc. so rare that people are actually chasing problems like this for a paycheck? It would be wonderful if that was the case, but I doubt that it is.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#129I'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?
there's hills I'd rather die on but it feels silly. What's appropriate is the transfer of the concept, not by how we judge the style of the analogy.
Ultimately if you're trying to edge proof language then you're just changing which bunch of people you're pissing off but I feel like people who do this act like its impossible they could piss anyone off over this.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#130We haven't gotten spelling assistance right, let alone grammar or semantics. Prefer editors with fewer "smart" features that distract from writing.
What i don't understand is how they can roll out this feature, while the last few weeks I've suddenly started getting spammed in Google Drive with obscene garbage that can only be blocked on an instance by instance basis. Surely they could offer some gate that allows the user to deploy such filters where they actually want them?