Sounds to me like a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" basically impossible task without making ML aware of cultural intricacies, trigger warnings, age app

Sounds to me like a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" basically impossible task without making ML aware of cultural intricacies, trigger warnings, age appropriate approaches and parental controls at the same time. Like, it's not like this filtering was done for the purpose of silencing anyone — Google (among others) really learned the hard way to not feed smut to ML models, as it _will_ get regurgitated, always as a possible PR disaster in the making: https://www.buzzfeed.com/fionarutherford/heres-why-some-people-think-googles-results-are-racist https://www.buzzfeed.com/fionarutherford/heres-why-some-peop... https://www.huffpost.com/entry/microsoft-tay-racist-tweets_n_56f3e678e4b04c4c37615502 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/microsoft-tay-racist-tweets_n... Still interesting research, but playing the devil's advocate, I think I can see why this part of the corpus was more extensively filtered away. Sad issue, but I don't think we'd have a sane way out without massive, manual whitelisting.