Live data from Hacker News

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

vice.com

391–400 of 1001 posts

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

#391
post #230
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not worried about being Damore'd, as I have a lot more experience fighting progressives than he does.

What things did Damore do wrong that you would do differently (honest question)

Mispredicted how people would read his essay. I asked him if he honestly didn’t see it coming. He said he honestly did not. That’s very naïve.

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

#392
post #242

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…

"Blacklist" and "whitelist" suck anyway because they require the cultural knowledge that "black is bad and white is good" to understand their meaning. "Allowlist" and "denylist" don't require any cultural background to understand - their names are purely descriptive. They are just better terms.

What about "redlist" and "greenlist"? The association between "red" and "stop", and between "green" and "go", seem more arbitrary than the associations with "black" and "white" but almost everyone in the world is familiar with traffic lights. (And the inhabitants of the North Sentinel Island probably don't need to configure mail servers or whatever.)

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

#393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You may very well may be right that terms "allowlist" and "blocklist" are objectively clearer. I'm in favor of the idea of changing language to make things clearer and more effective. But the contention I have is that these changes aren't motivated for the pursuit of clarity. They are motivated by a need for cleansing. "whitelist" and "blacklist" are innocuous terms. They have been around for ages. Used and understoo…

As I posted to a child: 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

#394
post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the natural outcome of far leftist ideologies. People need to wake up and start rejecting this destructive ideology where a person is evaluated only based on their identity. I think MLK had something to say about that.

MLK was a leftist - and arguably a "far leftist" for his time. If you're going to use him as an example, you may have to concede that this is not a "natural outcome" of leftist ideologies in general, but rather the outcome of some other selection pressure that rewards diversion from initiatives that actually affect peoples' material conditions.

I'm referring to modern far leftism, an offshoot from Marxism and post modernism.

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

#395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am incredulous at the "mother" to "birthing person" requirement. I have seen one or two people with such prescriptive views on language but the vast majority of people I know consider it ridiculous. And I am in an incredibly "woke" social bubble.

Encountering this aspect of the culture war always makes me wonder why are tech companies so focused on these gender minorities and not, say, on the disabled groups. There are more blind, deaf, mute (etc, etc) people in the US than transgender people who will bear a child. It would be equally incoherent to attempt to replace all usages of “see”, “hear” with “perceive”.

Twitch removed the "blind playthrough" tag not so long ago.

https://www.eurogamer.net/twitch-removes-blind-playthrough-t...

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

#396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not use proprietor?

Why not use Landlord, a word everyone understands?

Here's the definition of landlord I see

> A landlord is the owner of a house, apartment, condominium, land, or real estate which is rented or leased to an individual or business

How is that different from "property owner"? The difference is that to you, a native English speaker, landlord is a word you're familiar with. To others, it's a whole new word they need to learn, whereas property-owner is self-descriptive. It's like using good variable names in your code, you don't need to look up the definition of every word when you use re-use words that are common.

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

#397
post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could look at Grammarly ($10+ billion dollar valuation) as evidence that there is a market for a tool/plugin that improves a user’s prose.

Being told I use too many adjectives, my word choice is too heavy for my audience or that I used too many clauses is useful. Being passive-aggressively told "blacklist" is a no-no word is not. If you were really clever, you'd let the user set a "sensitivity" level for the writing from "normal human speak" to "corporate PR approved".

> you'd let the user set a "sensitivity" level for the writing

But what if the company found out (and some employee leaked) the fact that most people deliberately set the default level to "normal human speak", and its campaign to replace and redefine words doesn't have any democratic legitimacy (let alone add any commercial value)?

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

#398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. "Slave is an Ephebian word. In Om we have no word for slave," said Vorbis. "So I understand," said the Tyrant. "I imagine that fish have no word for water." -- Terry Pratchett, Small Gods

Either way, people here aren't discriminated based on their race. Never were. This particular problem seems to be uniquely American because of their history. We do have a word for racism by the way. It's, unsurprisingly, "расизм".

America certainly takes racism to extremes, but it's not a problem unique to the US - racism is a thing all over Europe and Asia too, to varying degrees.

I've never been to Russia, but I'm finding it hard to believe racism doesn't exist there.

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

#399
post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

You're right. I use the new terms and move on. It's really not that bad. However it tends to become a password game. There's a new password every few months. If you know the new password, you get to feel above those who don't. It's as we invent new crimes to charge people with. If no one calls it out (because sure, whatever), it keeps ratcheting up. Then banal conversations turn into minefields. What you say gets inv…

> What you say gets invalidated because you used the wrong password.

Is this a common occurrence for you? It has never happened to me.

I'm skeptical about whether it's actually and issue or mostly a hypothetical issue.

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

#400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. "Slave is an Ephebian word. In Om we have no word for slave," said Vorbis. "So I understand," said the Tyrant. "I imagine that fish have no word for water." -- Terry Pratchett, Small Gods

Either way, people here aren't discriminated based on their race. Never were. This particular problem seems to be uniquely American because of their history. We do have a word for racism by the way. It's, unsurprisingly, "расизм".

> Either way, people here aren't discriminated based on their race. Never were. This particular problem seems to be uniquely American because of their history.

I suspect you are overlooking some pretty pervasive discrimination against minority groups because you have become accustomed to it, and/or because you aren't personally affected by it. While racism in Russia appears to have been improving over the last decade or so, it is hardly absent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Russia

Post reply on HN