3 ms·
>If the training data is out of date, it's quite reasonable for people employing that model to decide it shouldn't return results based on the out-of-date train
by GameOfFrowns 4y ago
>If the training data is out of date, it's quite reasonable for people employing that model to decide it shouldn't return results based on the out-of-date training data.
It's not "out-of-date". That's just the kind of pilpul semantic framing that these activists engage in since "out-of-date" implies "bad". The data is just not in line with their artificially made-up ideology. A demand which one, even as the best "ally" in the world, could never satisfy anyway, since the grievance grifting relies on always coming up with new issues, you just have to look at the shift from "equality" to "equity" or from "microaggressions" to "nanoaggressions"
- mlyle 4y agoAll social conventions are artificially made-up ideology. If you insist on calling a black person a "negro", despite its change in connotation over time, you are not being very nice. If you train an AI, or a person, using old books to call someone a "negro", you're condoning and continuing offensive behavior. Ditto, here. > since the grievance grifting relies on always coming up with new issues, We pretty clearly, culturally, have a whole lot of issues. Becoming more nuanced in how we label them makes sense. And, of course, language changes rapidly. It especially changes rapidly when we're talking about marginalized groups. Pejoration is a process by which a word associated with marginalized groups become offensive over time. "Idiot", "moron", "retard" were all originally clinical and relatively non-offensive words, but society as a whole ended up changing them to include a value judgment. The euphemism treadmill is annoying, but insisting on continuing to call someone something that has developed a negative value judgment is not really good, either.