4 ms·

In the face of the alternative being "it's ok to be a dick sometimes, kids".. no. Say please. You've not presented any kind of argument. "This is a terrible id

by Jenk 5y ago

In the face of the alternative being "it's ok to be a dick sometimes, kids".. no. Say please. You've not presented any kind of argument. "This is a terrible idea" .. why?

klyrs 5y ago
OTOH, this does highlight the "other people's children" barn door in your proposal
- Jenk 5y ago
  Does it? You sure? "Be polite all of the time" has certainly been a lot easier to teach my own kids than "only be polite some of the time, because being polite all of the time is a bad thing" It goes right up there with the philosophy of every thing deserves respect, even the things you don't like.
  - klyrs 5y ago
    You and I share these values, and that's how I teach my kid (not that we have voice assistants hanging around). What I'm saying here is that you're teaching your values, but your values aren't universal. Other parents will teach their values, or simply set examples of behaviors that you disagree with. You can't simply solve the problem by teaching your kids. And if my experience is at all typical, your kid will also pick up values from those other people's kids.
    - Jenk 5y ago
      Ah, noted and agreed.
  - noduerme 5y ago
    Just because it's easier to teach your kids how to conform and behave without thinking doesn't mean it's better for them, or for society, does it? The fact that it's easier probably means it's lazy and wrong. There's no difference between telling children to always be polite to machines and telling children to always beware of foreigners. Both require obedience and shutting off critical insight. You are dehumanizing the world to them. This is why I took the time to write so many responses.
Dylan16807 5y ago
There's no such thing as being a dick to a voice assistant of this type.
- Jenk 5y ago
  Ja just ignore the obvious point of mistakenly being impolite to a person, eh?
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    How's that obvious? And does the rule of "be polite if it might be a person" not work? Also it's pretty normal to phrase things less politely to close acquaintances a lot of the time, and that's not being a dick either. "Be polite all the time" is overkill.
    - Jenk 5y ago
      > How's that obvious? > Just teach them to say please to Alexa et Al. Much easier and generally better to be polite when you don't need to be, than to be impolite when you're supposed to be, by mistake.
      - noduerme 5y ago
        What's even better is to be able to differentiate between people and computers.
        Jenk 5y ago
        Which is orthoganol to the point, anyway.
        anoncake 5y ago
        No, it isn't. By teaching children to treat machines like people, you teach them they are like people.
noduerme 5y ago
I thought the arguments would be obvious to a programmer, but if you insist... First off, everyone deserves basic respect and to be treated with dignity. Animals deserve respect and dignity as well (although we don't say "please" and "thank you" to them - I'll get to that in a moment). But you said "everything" deserves respect. That is not true. You don't teach politeness, or manners, or anything else, as a series of actions to repeat unthinkingly. You teach by forcing them to consider the reasons for doing certain things. There are obvious reasons to be polite to other people. First of all, other people understand what "please" means. Animals don't, and computers aren't sentient. But over-archingly, the value behind treating others with respect and animals with dignity is that life has value. Degrading other living things is ultimately degrading ourselves. If we don't treat them with dignity, what can we expect in return? Now, if you want to argue that Amazon Alexa is a sentient being worthy of polite respect, that would be a different question. But the argument against teaching a child to be respectful to a machine goes beyond just the obvious dystopian implications. The ultimate reason it's a bad idea is that like any form of obedience training that leads to irrational outcomes, it is ultimately rejected and ignored, because the logic and rules behind it were not inculcated, only the actions. To sum up: You don't teach rules by teaching how to follow them. You teach rules by teaching why they exist, and when to apply them. A child who says "please" and "thank you" to a machine has not learned any values or learned the point of why we say those things to each other. In fact, it makes the words meaningless. If all you want is obedience and you think your kid isn't bright enough to learn when and when not to apply certain behaviors, then you can try a shotgun approach, but you won't end up with someone capable of thinking for themselves. To me, raising an autonomous person capable of making judgments about new situations is the goal of child-rearing, but then again, I'm not an authoritarian. [edited for typos]
- Jenk 5y ago
  > You don't teach politeness, or manners, or anything else, as a series of actions to repeat unthinkingly. Yes you do. Everyone and everything is deserving of respect at all times, especially the ones/things you disagree with, or dislike. The same is of every thing from animals to material objects, lest they wantonly waste and/or damage stuff. This is why _every_ democracy in the world demands their politicians act with respect to their opposition. Some honor these rules more than others, yes, before you quote some breakdown of the process somewhere. Which renders the rest of your post pointless nonsense.

by Jenk 5y ago

In the face of the alternative being "it's ok to be a dick sometimes, kids".. no. Say please. You've not presented any kind of argument. "This is a terrible idea" .. why?

klyrs 5y ago

OTOH, this does highlight the "other people's children" barn door in your proposal

Jenk 5y ago
Does it? You sure? "Be polite all of the time" has certainly been a lot easier to teach my own kids than "only be polite some of the time, because being polite all of the time is a bad thing" It goes right up there with the philosophy of every thing deserves respect, even the things you don't like.
- klyrs 5y ago
  You and I share these values, and that's how I teach my kid (not that we have voice assistants hanging around). What I'm saying here is that you're teaching your values, but your values aren't universal. Other parents will teach their values, or simply set examples of behaviors that you disagree with. You can't simply solve the problem by teaching your kids. And if my experience is at all typical, your kid will also pick up values from those other people's kids.
  - Jenk 5y ago
    Ah, noted and agreed.
- noduerme 5y ago
  Just because it's easier to teach your kids how to conform and behave without thinking doesn't mean it's better for them, or for society, does it? The fact that it's easier probably means it's lazy and wrong. There's no difference between telling children to always be polite to machines and telling children to always beware of foreigners. Both require obedience and shutting off critical insight. You are dehumanizing the world to them. This is why I took the time to write so many responses.

Dylan16807 5y ago

There's no such thing as being a dick to a voice assistant of this type.

Jenk 5y ago
Ja just ignore the obvious point of mistakenly being impolite to a person, eh?
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  How's that obvious? And does the rule of "be polite if it might be a person" not work? Also it's pretty normal to phrase things less politely to close acquaintances a lot of the time, and that's not being a dick either. "Be polite all the time" is overkill.
  - Jenk 5y ago
    > How's that obvious? > Just teach them to say please to Alexa et Al. Much easier and generally better to be polite when you don't need to be, than to be impolite when you're supposed to be, by mistake.
    - noduerme 5y ago
      What's even better is to be able to differentiate between people and computers.
      - Jenk 5y ago
        Which is orthoganol to the point, anyway.
        anoncake 5y ago
        No, it isn't. By teaching children to treat machines like people, you teach them they are like people.

noduerme 5y ago

I thought the arguments would be obvious to a programmer, but if you insist... First off, everyone deserves basic respect and to be treated with dignity. Animals deserve respect and dignity as well (although we don't say "please" and "thank you" to them - I'll get to that in a moment). But you said "everything" deserves respect. That is not true. You don't teach politeness, or manners, or anything else, as a series of actions to repeat unthinkingly. You teach by forcing them to consider the reasons for doing certain things. There are obvious reasons to be polite to other people. First of all, other people understand what "please" means. Animals don't, and computers aren't sentient. But over-archingly, the value behind treating others with respect and animals with dignity is that life has value. Degrading other living things is ultimately degrading ourselves. If we don't treat them with dignity, what can we expect in return? Now, if you want to argue that Amazon Alexa is a sentient being worthy of polite respect, that would be a different question. But the argument against teaching a child to be respectful to a machine goes beyond just the obvious dystopian implications. The ultimate reason it's a bad idea is that like any form of obedience training that leads to irrational outcomes, it is ultimately rejected and ignored, because the logic and rules behind it were not inculcated, only the actions. To sum up: You don't teach rules by teaching how to follow them. You teach rules by teaching why they exist, and when to apply them. A child who says "please" and "thank you" to a machine has not learned any values or learned the point of why we say those things to each other. In fact, it makes the words meaningless. If all you want is obedience and you think your kid isn't bright enough to learn when and when not to apply certain behaviors, then you can try a shotgun approach, but you won't end up with someone capable of thinking for themselves. To me, raising an autonomous person capable of making judgments about new situations is the goal of child-rearing, but then again, I'm not an authoritarian. [edited for typos]

Jenk 5y ago
> You don't teach politeness, or manners, or anything else, as a series of actions to repeat unthinkingly. Yes you do. Everyone and everything is deserving of respect at all times, especially the ones/things you disagree with, or dislike. The same is of every thing from animals to material objects, lest they wantonly waste and/or damage stuff. This is why _every_ democracy in the world demands their politicians act with respect to their opposition. Some honor these rules more than others, yes, before you quote some breakdown of the process somewhere. Which renders the rest of your post pointless nonsense.