5 ms·

Maybe your parent commenter confuses PhD ("Doctor of Philosophy") with a graduation in philosophy?

by Lukas_Skywalker 6y ago

daniel957 6y ago
No, he was just being a racist, misogynistic ass.
- daniel957 6y ago
  Not sure why this is getting downvotes. When people say things like that, they’re usually racist and misogynistic. His comment was flagged for a reason.
  - lawnchair_larry 6y ago
    An absurd and highly inappropriate comment. You’re the first to bring up race. There is absolutely no reason to infer that parent has any issue with race or sex whatsoever.
    - daniel957 6y ago
      It’s called a dog whistle. You don’t have to specifically mention race or gender in order to imply something about it. It’s not inappropriate. I didn’t flag his comment. Someone else did. It should have been flagged and rightfully was. I think your points would come across better if you didn’t use such extreme words (absurd, highly inappropriate, absolutely). It’s your opinion, not a fact. I also find it funny that _my_ comment is highly inappropriate but the actual comment that was flagged is not? Why do you think that? I’m assuming you didn’t get a chance to read it, which begs the question, “Why did you feel the need to champion this cause?”
      - im3w1l 6y ago
        You are just a name calling bully, inventing accusations out of thin air and it's shameful that HN tolerates it.
        daniel957 6y ago
        Again, why are you championing the writer of a flagged comment? Like I said, I didn’t flag the comment. So clearly other people agree with me and saw what I saw. Sorry if that’s hard for you to swallow.
        ruslanbogan 6y ago
        More likely it was flagged by the aforementioned academics rather than people like you imagining dog whistles that aren't there. hth
        daniel957 6y ago
        So what about the if statements and racism? Please elaborate.
        daniel957 6y ago
        Friendly ping. I’m just asking to explain what you originally said. I’m not asking you to explain my interpretation of what you said, obviously.
      - daniel957 6y ago
        Also, ruslanbogan’s comment did mention race which confirms for me that you didn’t even read it. It accused the researchers of being racist towards if statements. (Please tell me you find that more absurd than what I wrote lol.) Again, why are you championing this cause when you’re clearly wrong?
      - daniel957 6y ago
        Also, ruslanbogan’s comment did mention race which confirms for me that you didn’t even read it. It accused the researchers of being racist towards if statements. (Please tell me you find that more absurd than what I wrote lol.) Again, why are you championing this cause when you’re _clearly_ wrong? I’m using an extreme word on purpose.
      - unishark 6y ago
        You are supposed to assume good faith about other posters though. And philosophy is (as far as I know) yet another male-dominated major so I don't get what you mean. Personally I think the flagged poster was just ranting about technophobia among machine learning bias researchers.
        daniel957 6y ago
        I’ve read enough of HN comments over the years and been in the industry even longer to know not to assume good faith. Sorry. Like I said, someone else flagged the comment, not me. As a simple example when Kobe Bryant died there were numerous comments on the post saying “Why is this here? This shouldn’t be on Hacker News.” (Even though he was an angel investor). Yet when some random (to me) soccer player died a couple of weeks ago, I didn’t see a single “This doesn’t belong on Hacker News” comment. I looked for them. I also looked up the soccer player to find anything he did remotely related to HN. There was none. It’s ok to accept that racist and sexist people exist, even on sites like Hacker News. After all, this is just Reddit, right? Maybe his comment was just so wacky that it made me think this. Is there an article or something that references researchers thinking if statements are racist? Is this like an in-joke at a certain company? I just don’t get it. What I do get is that lots of people will go out of their way to defend the writer of a _flagged_ comment.
        unishark 6y ago
        I'm referring to the posting guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
        daniel957 6y ago
        I knew what you were referring to. I simply don’t agree. Just like when I _know_ someone didn’t read the article, I will call them out on it. It really is ok. To be honest, I find it sort of lame whenever someone says “The guidelines say you’re not supposed to do that.” This isn’t elementary school. I think these sort of rules actually do a disservice to intellectual dialogue and aren’t working as intended. Why should I pretend that someone said something that they didn’t? Why should I pretend that someone read the article when it’s easily provable that they didn’t? Again, I didn’t flag the comment. It’s not just me who refused to give OP the benefit of the doubt. Maybe our reaction _is_ the strongest plausible interpretation. For example, I understand what you said about philosophy being a male-dominated field. But the article referenced _2_ female researchers by name. This is why there are other comments on this post complaining about the researchers being _whiny_. For example, Timnit Gebru, who does a lot of work in Ethical AI related to sexism and racism, was mentioned briefly. This is why some guy with the username “koreanguy” called Timnit racist and basically said he hates her guts. This is why OP ruslanbogan made some very wacky comment about if statements and racism. He mentioned race first, not me. (He also hasn’t elaborated fully on what he meant, but still has time to downvote me for some reason. He can easily say “No, I actually meant this. My bad.” It’s so simple, really.) Earlier, you mentioned technophobia. Take a moment and think about what are some of the biggest fears currently being researched related to Ethical AI. You guessed it: are machine learning algorithms doing more harm than good when it comes to the intersection of race and gender. ruslanbogan’s comment was flagged for a reason. When people make weird/wacky jokes about racism, it usually means that they’re racist. It’s a shame that you’re assuming good faith in him but not me. Here are a few links related to facial recognition: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/19/federal-study-confirms-racial-bias-many-facial-recognition-systems-casts-doubt-their-expanding-use/%3foutputType=amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/technolo... https://www.google.com/amp/s/venturebeat.com/2020/09/24/in-facial-recognition-challenge-top-ranking-algorithms-show-bias-against-black-women/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/venturebeat.com/2020/09/24/in-f... (And no, I’m not one of those users that hates amp pages. I’m glad there’s not a rule banning them :D) ((Jesus, I went from 26 points down to 15. Am I wrong about something? Or are there just more sexist/racist guys on HN than you thought unishark?))
    - Footkerchief 6y ago
      The original comment said "who think if statements are racist." That was the comment that brought up race, as a strawman no less.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

Maybe your parent commenter confuses PhD ("Doctor of Philosophy") with a graduation in philosophy?

daniel957 6y ago

No, he was just being a racist, misogynistic ass.

daniel957 6y ago
Not sure why this is getting downvotes. When people say things like that, they’re usually racist and misogynistic. His comment was flagged for a reason.
- lawnchair_larry 6y ago
  An absurd and highly inappropriate comment. You’re the first to bring up race. There is absolutely no reason to infer that parent has any issue with race or sex whatsoever.
  - daniel957 6y ago
    It’s called a dog whistle. You don’t have to specifically mention race or gender in order to imply something about it. It’s not inappropriate. I didn’t flag his comment. Someone else did. It should have been flagged and rightfully was. I think your points would come across better if you didn’t use such extreme words (absurd, highly inappropriate, absolutely). It’s your opinion, not a fact. I also find it funny that _my_ comment is highly inappropriate but the actual comment that was flagged is not? Why do you think that? I’m assuming you didn’t get a chance to read it, which begs the question, “Why did you feel the need to champion this cause?”
    - im3w1l 6y ago
      You are just a name calling bully, inventing accusations out of thin air and it's shameful that HN tolerates it.
      - daniel957 6y ago
        Again, why are you championing the writer of a flagged comment? Like I said, I didn’t flag the comment. So clearly other people agree with me and saw what I saw. Sorry if that’s hard for you to swallow.
        ruslanbogan 6y ago
        More likely it was flagged by the aforementioned academics rather than people like you imagining dog whistles that aren't there. hth
        daniel957 6y ago
        So what about the if statements and racism? Please elaborate.
        daniel957 6y ago
        Friendly ping. I’m just asking to explain what you originally said. I’m not asking you to explain my interpretation of what you said, obviously.
    - daniel957 6y ago
      Also, ruslanbogan’s comment did mention race which confirms for me that you didn’t even read it. It accused the researchers of being racist towards if statements. (Please tell me you find that more absurd than what I wrote lol.) Again, why are you championing this cause when you’re clearly wrong?
    - daniel957 6y ago
      Also, ruslanbogan’s comment did mention race which confirms for me that you didn’t even read it. It accused the researchers of being racist towards if statements. (Please tell me you find that more absurd than what I wrote lol.) Again, why are you championing this cause when you’re _clearly_ wrong? I’m using an extreme word on purpose.
    - unishark 6y ago
      You are supposed to assume good faith about other posters though. And philosophy is (as far as I know) yet another male-dominated major so I don't get what you mean. Personally I think the flagged poster was just ranting about technophobia among machine learning bias researchers.
      - daniel957 6y ago
        I’ve read enough of HN comments over the years and been in the industry even longer to know not to assume good faith. Sorry. Like I said, someone else flagged the comment, not me. As a simple example when Kobe Bryant died there were numerous comments on the post saying “Why is this here? This shouldn’t be on Hacker News.” (Even though he was an angel investor). Yet when some random (to me) soccer player died a couple of weeks ago, I didn’t see a single “This doesn’t belong on Hacker News” comment. I looked for them. I also looked up the soccer player to find anything he did remotely related to HN. There was none. It’s ok to accept that racist and sexist people exist, even on sites like Hacker News. After all, this is just Reddit, right? Maybe his comment was just so wacky that it made me think this. Is there an article or something that references researchers thinking if statements are racist? Is this like an in-joke at a certain company? I just don’t get it. What I do get is that lots of people will go out of their way to defend the writer of a _flagged_ comment.
        unishark 6y ago
        I'm referring to the posting guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
        daniel957 6y ago
        I knew what you were referring to. I simply don’t agree. Just like when I _know_ someone didn’t read the article, I will call them out on it. It really is ok. To be honest, I find it sort of lame whenever someone says “The guidelines say you’re not supposed to do that.” This isn’t elementary school. I think these sort of rules actually do a disservice to intellectual dialogue and aren’t working as intended. Why should I pretend that someone said something that they didn’t? Why should I pretend that someone read the article when it’s easily provable that they didn’t? Again, I didn’t flag the comment. It’s not just me who refused to give OP the benefit of the doubt. Maybe our reaction _is_ the strongest plausible interpretation. For example, I understand what you said about philosophy being a male-dominated field. But the article referenced _2_ female researchers by name. This is why there are other comments on this post complaining about the researchers being _whiny_. For example, Timnit Gebru, who does a lot of work in Ethical AI related to sexism and racism, was mentioned briefly. This is why some guy with the username “koreanguy” called Timnit racist and basically said he hates her guts. This is why OP ruslanbogan made some very wacky comment about if statements and racism. He mentioned race first, not me. (He also hasn’t elaborated fully on what he meant, but still has time to downvote me for some reason. He can easily say “No, I actually meant this. My bad.” It’s so simple, really.) Earlier, you mentioned technophobia. Take a moment and think about what are some of the biggest fears currently being researched related to Ethical AI. You guessed it: are machine learning algorithms doing more harm than good when it comes to the intersection of race and gender. ruslanbogan’s comment was flagged for a reason. When people make weird/wacky jokes about racism, it usually means that they’re racist. It’s a shame that you’re assuming good faith in him but not me. Here are a few links related to facial recognition: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/19/federal-study-confirms-racial-bias-many-facial-recognition-systems-casts-doubt-their-expanding-use/%3foutputType=amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/technolo... https://www.google.com/amp/s/venturebeat.com/2020/09/24/in-facial-recognition-challenge-top-ranking-algorithms-show-bias-against-black-women/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/venturebeat.com/2020/09/24/in-f... (And no, I’m not one of those users that hates amp pages. I’m glad there’s not a rule banning them :D) ((Jesus, I went from 26 points down to 15. Am I wrong about something? Or are there just more sexist/racist guys on HN than you thought unishark?))
  - Footkerchief 6y ago
    The original comment said "who think if statements are racist." That was the comment that brought up race, as a strawman no less.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]