4 ms·

Is there some context attached to why this is being done now?

by MattGaiser 6y ago

tmoaad 6y ago
I tried to provide context and got downvoted to hell. Wow!
- hannob 6y ago
  So you think github renaming its default branch restricts their freedom of speech? I'm confused...
  - africanboy 6y ago
    IMO it doesn't. But if it becomes the default for the 56 million GitHub developers, is it really freedom of speech? I don't disagree with renaming the default branch and I've been using the name develop as the default branch for 2 years now, but I am still not sure that changing it globally on a global platform qualifies as "good behaviour". Edit: If you disagree, can you please write a comment stating why you do? It would be very helpful, if I am saying something obviously wrong I would love to understand why. Thanks!
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  Did you just guess at what it's about out of thin air with absolutely no context of your own? Because it's very clearly not about GitHub and branch names - it's the ongoing thing with Pedro Domingos. If you don't know, best to not just guess especially when it's a contentious subject where people are already clearly super frought. That's probably why you got down-voted heavily.
- pc86 6y ago
  This is the only comment of yours I see in this thread.
  - MattGaiser 6y ago
    The comment was edited. It was originally about Github renaming master to main.
wetpaws 6y ago
People are getting sick and tired of sjw, I guess
pawsed 6y ago
Seeing the name of Pedro domingos and how he got cancelled for expressing his views in the recent incident involving Google and timnit gebru, makes me think it's probably related to that.
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  What consequences has he suffered? It looks like he's still employed. He's still tweeting.
- softwaredoug 6y ago
  How specifically was he canceled? I ask because googling him he seems gainfully employed... are his papers being rejected? Did something else happened?
- astura 6y ago
  Can you elaborate?
throwawaysea 6y ago
This began from a controversy where Anima Anandkumar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anima_Anandkumar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anima_Anandkumar), Director of AI at nvidia, posted a list of people she blocked on Twitter, encouraging her followers to "cancel" them. I wrote more about this and linked to her tweets in a past discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25419871 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25419871, but Anima Anandkumar has since deleted her tweets and then her account. One of her targets is Pedro Domingos, who is a professor at the University of Washington and a well-known expert in the space (he authored "The Master Algorithm"). Domingos is also known for being against the infiltration of "woke" culture into academic institutions, because it corrupts the purity of research and introduces political biases. This came up recently because NeurIPS (an AI conference) is going to require an "impact statement" for all submitted research papers, which has raised concerns about political bias at the conference, since researchers will likely include pandering progressive impact statements just to get through the process without controversy. Anandkumar has been one of the prominent activists pushing for NeurIPS to include impact statements, and was formerly involved in a campaign to push NeurIPS to be renamed from NIPS to NeurIPS (https://www.wired.com/story/ai-researchers-fight-over-four-letters-nips/ https://www.wired.com/story/ai-researchers-fight-over-four-l...). This new letter to ACM was already discussed on Hacker News (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25575321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25575321). The letter includes Domingos as an initial signatory, and the group the letter is being sent to (Communications of the ACM) lists Anima Anandkumar (who tried to cancel him) on their Editorial Board (https://cacm.acm.org/about-communications/editorial-board/ https://cacm.acm.org/about-communications/editorial-board/).
- caffeine 6y ago
  Request to downvoters: could you explain why? This seems like an interesting and relevant comment. Are there factual inaccuracies? Do you disagree with the characterization of Anandkumar? It would be useful to know what's wrong, as this comment will otherwise be pretty strongly informing my opinion on this topic.
  - happytoexplain 6y ago
    >Do you disagree with the characterization Surely this is why - there's nothing else subjective in the post.

Is there some context attached to why this is being done now?

tmoaad 6y ago

I tried to provide context and got downvoted to hell. Wow!

hannob 6y ago
So you think github renaming its default branch restricts their freedom of speech? I'm confused...
- africanboy 6y ago
  IMO it doesn't. But if it becomes the default for the 56 million GitHub developers, is it really freedom of speech? I don't disagree with renaming the default branch and I've been using the name develop as the default branch for 2 years now, but I am still not sure that changing it globally on a global platform qualifies as "good behaviour". Edit: If you disagree, can you please write a comment stating why you do? It would be very helpful, if I am saying something obviously wrong I would love to understand why. Thanks!
chrisseaton 6y ago
Did you just guess at what it's about out of thin air with absolutely no context of your own? Because it's very clearly not about GitHub and branch names - it's the ongoing thing with Pedro Domingos. If you don't know, best to not just guess especially when it's a contentious subject where people are already clearly super frought. That's probably why you got down-voted heavily.
pc86 6y ago
This is the only comment of yours I see in this thread.
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  The comment was edited. It was originally about Github renaming master to main.

wetpaws 6y ago

People are getting sick and tired of sjw, I guess

pawsed 6y ago

Seeing the name of Pedro domingos and how he got cancelled for expressing his views in the recent incident involving Google and timnit gebru, makes me think it's probably related to that.

pseudalopex 6y ago
What consequences has he suffered? It looks like he's still employed. He's still tweeting.
softwaredoug 6y ago
How specifically was he canceled? I ask because googling him he seems gainfully employed... are his papers being rejected? Did something else happened?
astura 6y ago
Can you elaborate?

throwawaysea 6y ago

This began from a controversy where Anima Anandkumar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anima_Anandkumar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anima_Anandkumar), Director of AI at nvidia, posted a list of people she blocked on Twitter, encouraging her followers to "cancel" them. I wrote more about this and linked to her tweets in a past discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25419871 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25419871, but Anima Anandkumar has since deleted her tweets and then her account. One of her targets is Pedro Domingos, who is a professor at the University of Washington and a well-known expert in the space (he authored "The Master Algorithm"). Domingos is also known for being against the infiltration of "woke" culture into academic institutions, because it corrupts the purity of research and introduces political biases. This came up recently because NeurIPS (an AI conference) is going to require an "impact statement" for all submitted research papers, which has raised concerns about political bias at the conference, since researchers will likely include pandering progressive impact statements just to get through the process without controversy. Anandkumar has been one of the prominent activists pushing for NeurIPS to include impact statements, and was formerly involved in a campaign to push NeurIPS to be renamed from NIPS to NeurIPS (https://www.wired.com/story/ai-researchers-fight-over-four-letters-nips/ https://www.wired.com/story/ai-researchers-fight-over-four-l...). This new letter to ACM was already discussed on Hacker News (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25575321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25575321). The letter includes Domingos as an initial signatory, and the group the letter is being sent to (Communications of the ACM) lists Anima Anandkumar (who tried to cancel him) on their Editorial Board (https://cacm.acm.org/about-communications/editorial-board/ https://cacm.acm.org/about-communications/editorial-board/).

caffeine 6y ago
Request to downvoters: could you explain why? This seems like an interesting and relevant comment. Are there factual inaccuracies? Do you disagree with the characterization of Anandkumar? It would be useful to know what's wrong, as this comment will otherwise be pretty strongly informing my opinion on this topic.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  >Do you disagree with the characterization Surely this is why - there's nothing else subjective in the post.