Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 84 posts

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#51

Post by Sgt_Apone »

bigbetsbigmoney wrote: post #46
iamatworknow wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've also started questioning how I phrase my own work related e-mails. Yesterday I was sent one from a partner saying that some files we were to transfer to their FTP server (yeah, I know it's 2017) were missing. So I logged into the server manually and checked -- the files were there, created at 5 AM, just like they are everyday when the cron job that generates them was run. So I started my response by saying, "I j…

well in this case your reply IS very condescending. lmao. "I just checked the server manually and the files were there. Could you check again and let me know if they still aren't showing up for you?" would probably be a better way to phrase what you're saying.

Agreed on its own, but I would consider the personality sending it. A manager I worked with sent emails that sounded like Data trying to parse human communication and often seemed condescending, but in person, the guy was very affable. Turns out he is just a poor communicator through text. If I got the above message from a someone in another division, I would think he was being condescending on purpose.

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#53

Post by ThrustVectoring »

Bartweiss wrote: post #41
Danihan wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at red lights as an example. Those are just primitive robots. Yet, when I'm sitting at an empty intersection at night, even though I have excellent, advanced sensors in my eyes, I'm not allowed to just run a red light. Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The robots already have the final say in that arena, because human law (for now) backs them up. It's not based on scary movies... primitive robots alrea…

> Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The town where I grew up has a red light which only changes when a weight sensor is tripped. But weight sensors are expensive, and the approaching two-lane road only has a sensor in one lane. Worse, it's calibrated for cars, so motorcycles never trip it. Yes, only . If you ride up late at night on a motorcycle, you have a choice between committing a serious traffic offens…

Does your local jurisdiction allow right turns on red? It'd be legal to turn right and pull U-turns until you get to the direction you want to go.

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#54

Post by waprin »

kartikt wrote: post #48
robbiemitchell wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google isn't a monolith. The author is on one team that wanted a way to encourage use of its services. They used an open source project to achieve it. Doesn't seem _that_ crazy to do rather than wait for some other team to build you an API.

The original comment is meant as an observation rather than an attack. It's great to see the author of the post use gmail.js to quickly get the sentiment analysis working with 30 lines of code. The library was a fun side project and has been used by many companies (big and small) over the past few years. Its always nice to see someone make a cool extension on top of gmail. Here is another one that came out a while ag…

Thanks for the library! It's super awesome, useful, and easy to use. And yes, it made writing this ridiculously simple, it's borderline embarrassing how little code I wrote, but that was also part of what made it neat to me.

This was just a "let's spend a few hours playing with the Natural Language API" hack day type thing. Robbie's comment perfectly explains the context behind it. Google search pointed me to your library, which fit the need perfectly well, so that's what I used and I really appreciate that you wrote it and gave it permissive license!

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#55

Post by ruleabidinguser »

robbiemitchell wrote: post #45
grinich wrote: post #16

Kind of crazy the Google Cloud team is using gmail.js to build this extension. Gmail.js is a side project by Kartik Talwar who just graduated college and the codebase isn't exactly active. I guess even Google can't find a good way to extend Gmail with their own APIs...

Google isn't a monolith. The author is on one team that wanted a way to encourage use of its services. They used an open source project to achieve it. Doesn't seem _that_ crazy to do rather than wait for some other team to build you an API.

I think we all understand why this is happening, but its still funny.

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#56

Post by [deleted] »

siliconc0w wrote: post #29
draw_down wrote: post #5

I think anger is ok and justified at times, and not always just a consequence of being in the wrong state of mind, etc. I think we're more and more moving to a mindset where anger is just not really ever acceptable, either to feel or to display. But, that's all a bit heavy for what this is trying to accomplish, which is certainly an understandable goal.

Anger is definitely not okay. Ideally, you say - 'This project isn't working because you failed to gather requirements from the right users." or "You spent three months choosing a vendor without proper due diligence who doesn't have a working client library, documentation, or a functioning test endpoint". However the proper way to express anger in our enlightened business environment is passively and non specifically…

[deleted]

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#57

Post by nebabyte »

Danihan wrote: post #42
nebabyte wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a terrible example. He's talking about control and overrides; in that context, a red light is a literal counterexample of your point. You can violate systems with overrides, and doing so might have consequences, but that's distinct from systems you can't override which was kemendo's point on our fear of where the control lies. (If tomorrow we decide to swap the meaning of red and green, that control is still h…

A driver cannot control nor override a light -- they can't make it change quickly colors when an intersection is obviously empty. They can only ignore it entirely. That's different. You wouldn't be "overriding" killer robots by hiding in underground tunnels. You'd just be avoiding them entirely. My main argument though is that people's distrust comes from extrapolation of negative real life experiences, not just from…

> A driver cannot control nor override a light

You can rewire it or shoot it with a gun. It has no physical control over your actions.

That is the actual sense of the word "control" in a humans-vs-robots debate.

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#58

Post by nebabyte »

Bartweiss wrote: post #41
Danihan wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at red lights as an example. Those are just primitive robots. Yet, when I'm sitting at an empty intersection at night, even though I have excellent, advanced sensors in my eyes, I'm not allowed to just run a red light. Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The robots already have the final say in that arena, because human law (for now) backs them up. It's not based on scary movies... primitive robots alrea…

> Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The town where I grew up has a red light which only changes when a weight sensor is tripped. But weight sensors are expensive, and the approaching two-lane road only has a sensor in one lane. Worse, it's calibrated for cars, so motorcycles never trip it. Yes, only . If you ride up late at night on a motorcycle, you have a choice between committing a serious traffic offens…

> If you ride up late at night on a motorcycle, you have a choice between committing a serious traffic offense and waiting several hours for the light to change

Uhh, or

(A) Back up, pull over your motorcycle, walk the crosswalk(s) as a pedestrian with a 'bike', get on motorcycle on the side of the road you want to go on, continue; or

(B) Make a right turn + U-turn as many times as needed to reach the desired turn? (3-way intersections can pose a problem, but the through road is most likely defaulting to green and if not you can pull over...)

If your municipality still treated either of the above as a 'serious traffic violation' yet still not springing for better sensors that likely exist for more mainstream compatibility then you're just living with idiots at that point (or they just don't like motorcycles :P)

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#59

Post by nebabyte »

randomerr wrote: post #30

Slippery slope - This seems like a couple of steps away from forced censoring of emails. I can see this becoming mandatory in emails and messages. But who would control the filters? Will extra meta data with content rating be sent along with message?

I just realized someone could create an honest-to-god "privilege checker"

groans

Post reply on HN