Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
It's also what will cause the far right to succeed. The left eats its own rather than being patient or tolerant ("I shouldn't have to teach you!") to people who mean well, while the right allows people to fly way off the handle and still be within their tent because their tent expands to include increasingly extreme ideas.
Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
231–240 of 1001 posts
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of when GitHub stopped using "master" for the default branch because it was somehow offensive.
My opinion: `main` is better. It's shorter, it's more descriptive, and costs nothing to remove something someone might find offensive. It's pretty much an all around win.
See how this works? It is also definitely not without cost. It is not free to change all of your documentation and you will inevitably have to be exposed to it anyway because not everyone will have changed it, so it's ultimately not doing anything anyway.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#233In 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 wouldn't mind calling Motherboard site to Personboard... ehhehehe It would be interesting to call landlord as landperson.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the challenges with moderation teams like that or similar is that the folks who REALLY want to do that job .. are the folks who absolutely should NOT be doing it.
Quoted post unavailable.
One thing that keeps me in check is that, I assume, the feeling is mutual. I'm guessing that in both camps there are people who have trouble believing that the other side is arguing/acting in good faith, because their position is so obviously ludicrous.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the point you're missing is that often moderators are in that position because they specifically want the power that comes with it. We see this all the time with volunteer moderators getting high on their power, pushing through whatever agenda they have regardless of user opinion. I think those types of people are even more likely to end up as paid content moderators, since the work tends to be too tedious fo…
» I think the point you're missing is that often moderators are in that position because they specifically want the power that comes with it. I love that you were courageous enough to say this because this is completely true and also why we say #ACAB. Most people who want to be police officers are absolutely unfit to be police officers!
There probably isn't any job which is an exception to this, politicians are similarly mainly people who want the associated influence and even engineers become engineers so they have control over engineering. It's just that the incentives are more perverse with politicians, police and moderators than with engineers.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#236In 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…
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 >.>
It ain't exactly the hottest, edgiest shitposting club out there.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I said motherboard all the time in meetings and chats, never had any pushback. TBH if I did get pushback on that one, I'd bring it to HR and say the pushback was affecting my ability to get work down. And get Damore'd?
I'm not worried about being Damore'd, as I have a lot more experience fighting progressives than he does.
It turns out American companies are not the Athenian Lyceum, and some topics are not up for debate.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone fairly familiar with the SJWs in a variety of FANGs, motherboard/mainboard doesn't even offend me any more. I kind of get it, even though it is lame logic. I'm waiting until they start marking "Latino" as non-inclusive, and start forcing "Latinx".
I mentally cannot process "Latinx" to be pronounced as anything but "Lah-tinks". I am prepared to be fully shafted if I ever have to say that word outloud at work, because people seem to visibly cringe when they hear it pronounced this way.
Re: Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can (i.e. you don't fear persecution), please let them know that this was the reason. Part of the reason these things have taken off is that their proponents are very vocal, while the opponents prefer to just mind their own business.
Absolutely do not do this. There is massive brigading that happens and the folks pushing the "anti-isms" are very very focused on this stuff. You will get on a list as some type of abuser / racist. Everyone knows to keep heads down on this stuff at a place like google or just find somewhere else to work. It really doesn't matter if you are liberal in all other ways even.
Though, I agree.. inquisitions and dogma are honeytraps for free-thinkers, by signalling dissent you are exposing that you arent under their ideological control.
Disagreeable sorts should, whereever possible, not raise their hand when asked, "do you have any hetrodox opinions?".