The 'broken' part is that it exists in the first place by default.
Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
171–180 of 1001 posts
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#172> Cutting phrases like “whitelist/blacklist” and “master/slave” out of our vocabulary not only addresses years of habitual bias in tech terminology, but forces us as writers and researchers to be more creative with the way we describe things. > calling landlords “property owners” is almost worse than calling them “landchads,” and half as accurate. It’s catering to people like Howard Schultz who would prefer you not c…
I think you're misreading. Nowhere in the article did the author say she "liked the tool" for removing whitelist/blacklist.
Obviously the former example is written in more positive language than the latter.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
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",…
No, those folks are not there just to get a paycheck. They are evangelists for a viewpoint who use their moderation powers to eliminate thoughts they don't like . And yes, those teams really did come up with their determinations of what was OK and what wasn't, based on their own beliefs. That made that quite clear in their repeated, stupid posts on memegen.
1st rule about memegen, is don't talk about memegen >.>
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#174Well, such things are always driven by demand. And unfortunately, there is a strong demand in our society for policing words, renaming formulas and issuing apologies all while: * Property ownership is becoming out of question for an increasing fraction of Americans * Any kid of retirement (as in not having to work and enjoying life off your savings) has become a pipe dream * Having a single-income family with one par…
What I don't understand is, where is this perceived demand coming from? I think it is an extremely small minority that happens to be extremely loud on social media and in corporate circles, so the perception of how important this issue is has become grossly exaggerated. I don't think this is purposeful malice on anyone's part, I think it is just a product of social media amplification and the elites desire to constan…
Unfortunately, there is a very solid explanation for it and it doesn't yield a good prognosis:
1. There is a small minority of people who truly believed in it in the first place.
2. Then there are people who exploit the system by charging hefty sums for diversity trainings (and calling any opponents to such spending racist).
3. Then there are people who sold the #2 group the student loans and gave the degrees where all you need to graduate is to repeat a fairly basic set of dogmas.
4. There are people who are disillusioned about the whole thing, but are now stuck with the student loans and no other way to make comparable money.
5. There are entrepreneurial people that want to make a change, but since most business niches are occupied by the corporations, the only outlet they have found is to join the diversity & inclusion effort.
6. There are people that want to get rid of their competitors. And since being not inclusive enough is now a firable offense, they are stuck competing who can say more things they don't really believe in.
Ironically, it reminds me of the political situation in Russia, where many people support the war despite suffering economically from it, despite having their children slaughtered, despite losing the rest of civil freedoms in the past months. The mechanism is the same: if you don't play along with the narrative, the competition will eat you alive. And it you overplay it in a clever way, you can get a promotion or a government contract.
I wish sociologists actually studied such phenomena rather than being another echo chamber for the same narrative as everyone else.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#175You mean all this time I could have cashed in on some microaggression victimhood because of all those daughterboards and daughter cards that weren't called son cards? How come that never ocurred to me? How did I survive all these decades with that boot on my neck?
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would "landlord" be considered a slur?
It's not a slur, it's just distinguishing people between those that own property and those that don't. As such, it's offensive to large swathes of disadvantaged people.
"People who own property" and "people who don't own property" are very real and in many cases important groups to discuss. If the fact that I'm a property owner (not a landlord though) offends someone who isn't, well... tough. The correct response would be to tell these people to stop being so soft and getting offended over absolutely nothing.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#177Well, such things are always driven by demand. And unfortunately, there is a strong demand in our society for policing words, renaming formulas and issuing apologies all while: * Property ownership is becoming out of question for an increasing fraction of Americans * Any kid of retirement (as in not having to work and enjoying life off your savings) has become a pipe dream * Having a single-income family with one par…
The elites of America use "inclusivity" and race as bait to distract from the very issues you describe. Notice how we, as a society, spent relatively little time discussing the 2008 Mortgage Crisis and Occupy Wall Street. Meanwhile news outlets have been beating the "inclusivity" / race / gender drum for _years_. Time to wake up, folks.
Ever heard of Rojava?
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#178Have there ever been any studies that show that using the masculine pronoun in the neuter reference in English, impacts (or has ever impacted) the well-being of females?
Until a couple decades ago it was well understood that in English the "masculine" was gender-neutral and the "feminine" was an honorific. Hence why esteemed possessions, countries, etc. were referred to in the feminine. Is it possible that taking away that honorific from women has harmed their sense of self-worth or some other aspect of their well-being?
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#179This is straight up a prelude to Orwellian thought control via language modification. Can nobody really see through this corporate "woke" smokescreen?
It's not about "social justice," it's about instilling totalitarian patterns in the population. There is no debate about these "woke" issues. There's an incredible intolerance on one side, and they claim to have indisputable moral superiority. Anyone who goes against the "woke" agenda is deemed to be evil. There's no debate. Just an automatic classification, "You're wrong AND evil."
That's just how it was in Nazi Germany. No debate, no nuance. You're a jew? To the chambers with you.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#180In 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?
Pushing back against this type of policy is generally a bad idea... There is a very vocal minority who will make life hard for you. This is a case where the vast majority know it's best to keep their thoughts to themselves.