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

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

#361

Post by karmakurtisaani » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:01 PM UTC

yupper32 wrote: post #335

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…

Sorry but did you just say one of the reasons you left google was the memegen moderation team? I can't imagine that being a legitimate worry that would impact my employment decisions. It seems there's a group of people who are too far in the other direction too. When I heard that it's preferred to say "allowlist" instead of "whitelist", do you know what my reaction was? "Sure, whatever." And I moved on with my life.…

I find this a very reasonable approach. I also find it natural that language evolves and sometimes it can even be marginally beneficial to artificially guide the evolution. All in all, in practice it just doesn't matter in my life.

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

#362

Post by umvi » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:01 PM UTC

madamelic wrote: post #166

olalonde wrote: post #42

Earlier 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.

I don't mind "main" for the main branch but for existing projects...

> costs nothing to remove something someone might offensive

It might break scripts, aliases, and any general automation (CI, etc) with a baked in main branch assumption

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

#363

Post by vimy » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:04 PM UTC

shp0ngle wrote: post #344

vimy wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I’m pessimistic about the West winning the second cold war. While Chinese engineers are working hard on world dominating AI models and other hard tech, Western engineers are wasting man hours on crap like this.

Oh come on now. Chinese have far bigger and far more strict word list bans. In US, you need to say “people who menstruate” and “land owning person”; in China you will just just disappear if you say a wrong thing against the regime.

It’s about a lot more than just forbidden words. The ‘social justice’ fanatics are a black hole for productivity.

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

#364

Post by bjt2n3904 » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:05 PM UTC

______-_-______ wrote: post #90

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…

"Motherboard" is particularly unbelievable. The motherboard runs the machine. It's a woman in a position of power. Isn't that what everyone says they want? Or is the idea to just erase the very concept of gender from the world? Welcome to OkCupid, I am a [PERSON] seeking [PERSON] I want out of this timeline

The most tragic part of the endgame of transgender ideology is the erasure of gender.

We'll promise them they can be a boy. They do all the things boys can: can play on the boys sports teams, use the boys lockers and bathrooms... And all the meanwhile we're banishing gendered extracurricular programs and making the bathrooms unisex.

We promise them we'll help them find their identity in gender, and destroy gender in the process.

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

#365

Post by djitz » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:05 PM UTC

yupper32 wrote: post #335

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…

Sorry but did you just say one of the reasons you left google was the memegen moderation team? I can't imagine that being a legitimate worry that would impact my employment decisions. It seems there's a group of people who are too far in the other direction too. When I heard that it's preferred to say "allowlist" instead of "whitelist", do you know what my reaction was? "Sure, whatever." And I moved on with my life.…

No post body was provided.

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

#366

Post by trollied » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:06 PM UTC

madamelic wrote: post #189

dymk wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> words we've been using for decades to describe a concept. Yeah, and so was calling black men "boy" or using the n-word like 50 years ago. Language changes because people realize there are better words that more people are okay with.

Language also adapts over decades so that words are computer/IT terms & have no other connotations. Like most of the stuff in this thread. Have a think about that.

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

#367

Post by dane-pgp » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:06 PM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #180

gorwell wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> the vast majority know it's best to keep their thoughts to themselves.

If it's really the case that the vast majority of employees are feeling stifled by the company policy, isn't that a situation where forming a trade union could help?

The irony of workers rising up against oppressive supposedly left-wing rule is not lost on me, especially if it were to occur in Google's office in Poland.

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

#368

Post by vorpalhex » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:06 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?

Why not use Landlord, a word everyone understands?

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

#369

Post by kevingadd » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:07 PM UTC

grishka wrote: post #269

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 Eu…

While I'm sure the shape of discrimination in your culture is different and not heavily racial, it's unwise to conclude that racial discrimination isn't happening just because you don't see the textbook version of it in front of you. The assumption that a black person can't possibly be local can lead some people to act in a discriminatory way that would produce bad outcomes.

A good example would be some of the pieces out there about what it's like to live in Japan as a black person, like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMpxLmMnS6M - their society is definitely not going to racially discriminate like the US does, but that doesn't mean you won't experience any discrimination or unusual treatment due to your skin color being different.

Also, if people get discriminated against based on their nationality and you just said a black person can't possibly be From Here... it seems like if you combine those two statements that would mean black people would naturally get discriminated against since they're foreigners?

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

#370

Post by travisgriggs » Fri, Apr 22, 2022, 6:07 PM UTC

lxgr wrote: post #337

travisgriggs wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you inferring/suggesting that the "right" avoids eating its own?

Exactly – if anything, research suggests that there might be some underlying mechanism affecting both ends of the political spectrum. I found this to be a very interesting read on the subject: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-...

Yep. Read and appreciated that article. And I will say what I have been repeating in these forums for a couple of months now again. It's ironic in this case, because today's hot topic is "the meaning of words".

We keep talking about social media and its problematic effects. Like we don't know how to be social or something anymore.

It's not social media. It's profit/engagement media. The social component is just the hook. The point of it all is basic profit feedback loops (which are far less greedy and evil than we make these utilities out to be--they're just doing what they were instituted to do).

My current brainstorm/crazy idea is that something like "non profit" regulations might be how we coral this nuttiness. It's been semi/mostly effective at corralling religion in America for many years. I'm not sure why we wouldn't benefit from moving the Twitter Day Saints and Instagramists and Tik-Tok-ies and SnapChat Witnesses and Roamin Pathic Twitch into the same "you have your place, you can take care of your own and collect enough funds to operate and some, but if you start looking too much like a business and/or play in politics too much, it's going to get really uncomfortable for you."