Live data from Hacker News

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

vice.com

721–730 of 1001 posts

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

#721
post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I've seen an English linter to help you maintain a passive voice for papers, remove waffle words and unnecessary fluff, etc. I'm not sure I can find the exact one I'm thinking of, but wasn't too bad overall, it spotted errors and made helpful suggestions. It was cool too, because it would read from stdin and integrated into vim pretty well with a few lines in my config.

Why would you want to maintain a passive voice? That's terrible writing unless you are defendant in litigation.

It's extremely important in a lot of policy positions to be able to use things like "a decision was made".

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

#722
post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A $trillion corporation's garbage product is The Left now?

It seems people forget that actual leftism is an economic theory regarding how labour relates to capital. The fact that it's conflated with angry twitter wokescolds is very convenient for those who want to turn people away from leftist economic ideas.

People say the same about the religious right 20-30 years ago. The modern, younger right really isn't concerned with censoring video games or making blasphemy illegal, but the general perception by anyone on the outside is that they'll force you into church on Sundays and go around lynching the melanated.

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

#723

It’s also inaccurate to call this language “inclusive.” In reality, you’re excluding most Americans who aren’t among the handful of mostly affluent, white, college educated people who talk like this. My Bangladeshi immigrant mom would have no idea what to do if a warning popped up telling her that she should use a different word than “mother.”

Hear hear. Latinx, Filipinx - how dare the whites invent terminology to refer to disadvantaged minorities, using incorrect grammatical constructions or letters not even in the language of the people you refer to. This is white cultural imperialism, full stop. Right or left, I don't care where it comes from - I know it when I smell it.

This is an inherent feature of the emerging system where cultural norms flow top-down from college educated professionals (who are far whiter than the population as a whole). That’ll be true even on matters relating to minorities, because it’ll be college educated white people empowered to decide which non-white people get a platform.

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

#724
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This AI strikes me as being so dystopian. Time to break out and read Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four again. A true AI would respond to user behavior and back off or change accordingly. Reminds me of Google News which keeps inserting articles about Kardashians no matter how often I tell it to "include fewer of these stories". For all the hype of Google's advanced AI, instead we get faceless, imperious NannyTech.

is it even AI? They claim it's a language model analysing human bias but it's blindingly obvious that it is just a human curated blacklist. Maybe they're using a language model for part of speech tagging or to suggest alternative words with similar meaning but there's no way an AI decided that "motherboard" is taboo.

Yes an AI in this case would be more intelligent than whichever human designed this feature. Google is actually a pioneer in the space of AI comment toxicity filters.

Even a toy solution would be smarter, you could compare the TF-IDF of each word in different populations (woke, average, toxic) to identify non-woke language, if that was the intention - not saying it’s right.

This is clearly just someone who ran a regex over a dictionary and didn’t check the output of their script for scunthorpes such as “motherboard”. It’s so low tech for Google, 1990s technology.

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

#725

It’s also inaccurate to call this language “inclusive.” In reality, you’re excluding most Americans who aren’t among the handful of mostly affluent, white, college educated people who talk like this. My Bangladeshi immigrant mom would have no idea what to do if a warning popped up telling her that she should use a different word than “mother.”

Hear hear. Latinx, Filipinx - how dare the whites invent terminology to refer to disadvantaged minorities, using incorrect grammatical constructions or letters not even in the language of the people you refer to. This is white cultural imperialism, full stop. Right or left, I don't care where it comes from - I know it when I smell it.

This has nothing to do with “white” and everything to do with regressive left.

Here is Kamala Harris, an Indian-Black American, pushing “Latinx”:

https://mobile.twitter.com/kamalaharris/status/1290733001320...

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

#727
post #668

I wonder if this is an example of not knowing your audience (or rather assuming one's self represents a wider audience than it does). The people vouching for this at Google are likely product marketing managers, public relations folks, social media managers, etc. All they do is write corporate garbage all day, and much like we have "nit"s in PR's for formatting, variable names, etc; they likely have similar reviews t…

This actually…doesn’t not make sense

>"This actually…doesn’t not make sense"

I don't understand what you are referring to when you say "this"; what is "this"? Are you referring to a specific statement by the parent poster, or something described in the OP?

I also don't understand whether the double-negative is intentional (and meant to cancel itself out, and become a positive), or if it is a colloquialism.

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

#728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hear hear. Latinx, Filipinx - how dare the whites invent terminology to refer to disadvantaged minorities, using incorrect grammatical constructions or letters not even in the language of the people you refer to. This is white cultural imperialism, full stop. Right or left, I don't care where it comes from - I know it when I smell it.

This is an inherent feature of the emerging system where cultural norms flow top-down from college educated professionals (who are far whiter than the population as a whole). That’ll be true even on matters relating to minorities, because it’ll be college educated white people empowered to decide which non-white people get a platform.

No post body was provided.

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

#729

> Emily Lipstein typed “Motherboard” (as in, the name of this website) into a document and Google popped up to tell her she was being insensitive: “Inclusive warning. Some of these words may not be inclusive to all readers. Consider using different words.” It’s amazing how a Fortune 500 company can release a product that chastises you for using the word “motherboard” because it has “mother” in it, while other people…

> “mainstream” on the left

What connection is there between left/progressive thought and this particular brand of corporate speak?

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

#730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people who are just plain nuts Are you suggesting that it's "plain nuts" to be against private ownership of land?

As someone who somewhat supports public land ownership (of the Georgism variety), I think you'd have to be plain nuts to use that belief to justify discouraging others to use the word 'landlord'. Especially considering I hear the word more from people who oppose land ownership than from anyone else. I'm more inclined to believe that this is about gender.

Exactly. One won't eliminate the concept by eliminating the word to describe the concept.
Post reply on HN