Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very broken • Hacker News Board

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

#261

Post by as300 » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:28 PM UTC

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…

A worse one is to me is that they aren't allowed to say "Quantum Supremacy", because it reminds some people of "White Supremacy"? Nevermind that you actually give that concept more power when you make it so that even discussing it or inadvertently bring it up is stigmatized. Things are starting to get kind of Orwellian.

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

#262

Post by CoastalCoder » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:28 PM UTC

IAmWorried wrote: post #217

ushakov wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why does a company have a say which words are allowed to be used? i mean there are some bad words you shouldn’t use, but i just can’t grasp why is there something like “motherboard” on that list?

Quoted post unavailable.

I'm pretty skeptical of labor unions in the U.S., but I can see how they could help with this kind of issue.

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

#263

Post by glasshug » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:28 PM UTC

awofford wrote: post #172

nmilo wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> On a more extreme end, if someone intends to be racist, sexist, or exclusionary in their writing, and wants to draft that up in a Google document, they should be allowed to do that without an algorithm attempting to sanitize their intentions and confuse their readers.

The author does position themselves against algorithmic sanitization generally.

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

#264

Post by xg15 » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

tempnow987 wrote: post #212

oh_sigh wrote: post #26

Earlier 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".

LatinX is complicated. If (white person) corrects someone of hispanic origin that using the word latino is offensive and they should use latinx - I've gotten some pushback. It may be best to just let the folks who care about getting to Latinx hash it out themselves. I've started seeing folx as well instead of folks. Was curious about the offensiveness of folks?

Wasn't the x originally a gender thing? As in "folks" is gender neutral while "folx" actively acknowledges non-heteronormative genders.

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

#265

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

knorker wrote: post #156

luxuryballs wrote: post #97

Since 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…

I think they're trying to change language to disassociate "black" with negative meaning. Which is going to be very hard, because the reason for the association is from black being the unknown. It's the night that hides the predators. It's the shadow where the enemy hides. It's where you don't want to put your foot in case there are spiders or a sharp rock. Humans are afraid of the dark. I've not even heard of being a…

[deleted]

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

#266

Post by causalmodels » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

monkeybutton wrote: post #229

chrisfosterelli wrote: post #61

> 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…

Why not use proprietor?

Because it leads to confusion.

Example: Is the proprietor of a bar the person running it or the landlord who owns the building?

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

#267

Post by bombcar » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #113

bombcar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Apartment buildings yes, but most single family homes (where people use the term landlord the most I suspect) are usually owned by an identifiable individual.

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

#268

Post by skrbjc » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

tempnow987 wrote: post #212

oh_sigh wrote: post #26

Earlier 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".

LatinX is complicated. If (white person) corrects someone of hispanic origin that using the word latino is offensive and they should use latinx - I've gotten some pushback. It may be best to just let the folks who care about getting to Latinx hash it out themselves. I've started seeing folx as well instead of folks. Was curious about the offensiveness of folks?

Folx is just a way to signal that you are woke. Since they have pushed folks for everything and co-called "normies" are using it now, they need to go a step further to make sure you know they are part of the special group.

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

#269

Post by grishka » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #13

One 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…

> somebody had to explain to them there are people in the world who are discriminated against, but aren't black.

As a Russian, this is amusing to read. For me and most people I know, when you meet a black person, it's totally normal to ask them "where are you from" because they can't possibly be local. Our society just doesn't have the concept of racism it seems because of the exceeding rarity of people who aren't European or Asian.

People in Russia are often discriminated against based on their sexual orientation, political views, and nationality though.

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

#270

Post by wincy » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

changoplatanero wrote: post #93

mc4ndr3 wrote: post #5

We haven't gotten spelling assistance right, let alone grammar or semantics. Prefer editors with fewer "smart" features that distract from writing.

> We haven't gotten spelling assistance right Shouldn't you say that we got spelling assistance correct instead of right? Left-handed people might not like to see the word "right" being used to mean "correct"

L

As a left handed non birthing person, I was very offended by their comment. Also I was a little offended by your comment, please in the future include “L” or “R” at the beginning of all messages.

Thank you for attempting to be a left handed ally.