9 ms·

It says in the article that Google (and Microsoft, Dell, Amazon + FB/Meta) aren't (yet?) implementing this, but I didn't see anything about them doing the oppos

by smcl 4y ago

It says in the article that Google (and Microsoft, Dell, Amazon + FB/Meta) aren't (yet?) implementing this, but I didn't see anything about them doing the opposite. Additionally I don't imagine they'd gain much from doing so, as a business. Is there any more info on this?

pessimizer 4y ago
- cscurmudgeon 4y ago
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > is not evidence of a bias Correct. But it is evidence someone doesn’t want to talk about this. That might mean anything from complicity to ignorance to not wanting more workplace drama. In every case, it gives merit to Googlers claiming caste discrimination needs an independent investigation. (Versus relying on the company’s processes.)
  - DubiousPusher 4y ago
    > Where is their concern for other violence that is more prevalent? Isn't this just straightforward whataboutism? If every person that is advocating against a problem in society has to advocate against every problem in society they will never get anything accomplished because there is always another injustice.
    - malfist 4y ago
      Not only is it just straightforward whataboutism, it's also implying, we as a society, can only work on one problem at a time. If we're tackling caste discrimination, we can't also be working to reduce violence. This is an either/or logical fallacy.
- happytoexplain 4y ago
  This is a great example of the kind of hyper-reactivity that makes conversation on most of the internet absolutely impossible. The parent said they didn't see this in the article, don't imagine they'd gain from it, and asked for more info about it - all totally reasonable thoughts and expressed without negativity. And yet you responded with snide superiority, as though your dialogue with this person was already an argument before it even started.
  - curiousllama 4y ago
    Pessimizer should be more optimistic
  - Moodles 4y ago
    100%. I found the books “how to have impossible conversations” and “crucial conversations” helpful for me, but in a nutshell they’re basically “say things in a way that protect the other side’s ego”
    - adolph 4y ago
      Do they go into ego-injury detection? I get blind sided by alternative interpretations all the time.
    - nomel 4y ago
      Related, the difference between a "nerd" and "normal person" tact filter: https://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html https://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html
  - politician 4y ago
    Is anyone working on ML to determine possible avenues of response and debate given a prompt?
    - kokey 4y ago
      I would love to see some social networks silently implementing something that rewrites comments in a more diplomatic manner when displayed to everyone else.
- smcl 4y ago
  I think it was a fair question to ask, wasn’t it? Article says Google simply haven’t got an anti-caste-discrimination policy, someone says something implying that they’re actually getting worse re caste discrimination, so I ask for more info because that’s truly surprising.
boppo1 4y ago
Wouldn't lose much either. I'd argue they'd gain face in today's climate. "DEI best practices aren't just for white people anymore" is probably a good look.
- rayiner 4y ago
  Ironically it tends to be high caste Indians who push this stuff (perhaps because of higher education levels). Maybe they’ll be circumspect about dishing it out to white people after some sessions having to confess their “Brahmin privilege.”
  - laretluval 4y ago
    I predict they’ll love the opportunity to indulge in theatrical ethnomasochism, just like high status whites do.
    - rayiner 4y ago
      I don’t know. Maybe that’s a Puritan thing.
    - ummonk 4y ago
      In a way, atoning for privilege will allow them to signal their privileged status more openly, and try to angle for acceptance into high status white culture, because they're just like them.
  - zmgsabst 4y ago
    Discussing your “privilege” while inflicting the costs to atone for it on others is the humble-brag version of racism: Wealthy whites are all too happy to brag about their privileges, while discriminating against poor whites to “atone” for that.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    >> Wouldn't lose much either. I'd argue they'd gain face in today's climate. "DEI best practices aren't just for white people anymore" is probably a good look. > Ironically it tends to be high caste Indians who push this stuff (perhaps because of higher education levels). High caste Indian immigrants or their American children? I have trouble imagining someone raised outside of the American cultural context getting enthusiastic about DEI in that way.
spinningarrow 4y ago
From the article: > Just a few months ago in June, Google, whose CEO Sundar Pichai has Indian roots, cancelled a talk on caste discrimination where Dalit rights activist Thenmozhi Soundararajan was supposed to give a presentation. The talk was organised by Google employee Tanuja Gupta. It’s not the opposite but probably what GP was referring to.
- mcv 4y ago
  It's why I used the word "seems". It doesn't prove they're going the opposite direction, but it does give that impression. Hopefully Google is taking this issue more seriously.
  - lambdasquirrel 4y ago
    A lot of racism is not explicit. Plausible deniability above all else.
  - civilized 4y ago
    They punished Tanuja Gupta for raising the issue, to the point where she resigned. https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/googles-caste-bias-problem https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/googles-caste-bias-pr... Google is taking the issue more seriously, but in an evil direction rather than a good one.
- throw_a_grenade 4y ago
  For those who don't know how to recognise a caste from the name, does anyone have any idea which caste Google's CEO might represent? Can it even be definitely derived just from name?

by smcl 4y ago

pessimizer 4y ago

cscurmudgeon 4y ago
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > is not evidence of a bias Correct. But it is evidence someone doesn’t want to talk about this. That might mean anything from complicity to ignorance to not wanting more workplace drama. In every case, it gives merit to Googlers claiming caste discrimination needs an independent investigation. (Versus relying on the company’s processes.)
- DubiousPusher 4y ago
  > Where is their concern for other violence that is more prevalent? Isn't this just straightforward whataboutism? If every person that is advocating against a problem in society has to advocate against every problem in society they will never get anything accomplished because there is always another injustice.
  - malfist 4y ago
    Not only is it just straightforward whataboutism, it's also implying, we as a society, can only work on one problem at a time. If we're tackling caste discrimination, we can't also be working to reduce violence. This is an either/or logical fallacy.
happytoexplain 4y ago
This is a great example of the kind of hyper-reactivity that makes conversation on most of the internet absolutely impossible. The parent said they didn't see this in the article, don't imagine they'd gain from it, and asked for more info about it - all totally reasonable thoughts and expressed without negativity. And yet you responded with snide superiority, as though your dialogue with this person was already an argument before it even started.
- curiousllama 4y ago
  Pessimizer should be more optimistic
- Moodles 4y ago
  100%. I found the books “how to have impossible conversations” and “crucial conversations” helpful for me, but in a nutshell they’re basically “say things in a way that protect the other side’s ego”
  - adolph 4y ago
    Do they go into ego-injury detection? I get blind sided by alternative interpretations all the time.
  - nomel 4y ago
    Related, the difference between a "nerd" and "normal person" tact filter: https://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html https://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html
- politician 4y ago
  Is anyone working on ML to determine possible avenues of response and debate given a prompt?
  - kokey 4y ago
    I would love to see some social networks silently implementing something that rewrites comments in a more diplomatic manner when displayed to everyone else.
smcl 4y ago
I think it was a fair question to ask, wasn’t it? Article says Google simply haven’t got an anti-caste-discrimination policy, someone says something implying that they’re actually getting worse re caste discrimination, so I ask for more info because that’s truly surprising.

boppo1 4y ago

Wouldn't lose much either. I'd argue they'd gain face in today's climate. "DEI best practices aren't just for white people anymore" is probably a good look.

rayiner 4y ago
Ironically it tends to be high caste Indians who push this stuff (perhaps because of higher education levels). Maybe they’ll be circumspect about dishing it out to white people after some sessions having to confess their “Brahmin privilege.”
- laretluval 4y ago
  I predict they’ll love the opportunity to indulge in theatrical ethnomasochism, just like high status whites do.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    I don’t know. Maybe that’s a Puritan thing.
  - ummonk 4y ago
    In a way, atoning for privilege will allow them to signal their privileged status more openly, and try to angle for acceptance into high status white culture, because they're just like them.
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  Discussing your “privilege” while inflicting the costs to atone for it on others is the humble-brag version of racism: Wealthy whites are all too happy to brag about their privileges, while discriminating against poor whites to “atone” for that.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  >> Wouldn't lose much either. I'd argue they'd gain face in today's climate. "DEI best practices aren't just for white people anymore" is probably a good look. > Ironically it tends to be high caste Indians who push this stuff (perhaps because of higher education levels). High caste Indian immigrants or their American children? I have trouble imagining someone raised outside of the American cultural context getting enthusiastic about DEI in that way.

spinningarrow 4y ago

From the article: > Just a few months ago in June, Google, whose CEO Sundar Pichai has Indian roots, cancelled a talk on caste discrimination where Dalit rights activist Thenmozhi Soundararajan was supposed to give a presentation. The talk was organised by Google employee Tanuja Gupta. It’s not the opposite but probably what GP was referring to.

mcv 4y ago
It's why I used the word "seems". It doesn't prove they're going the opposite direction, but it does give that impression. Hopefully Google is taking this issue more seriously.
- lambdasquirrel 4y ago
  A lot of racism is not explicit. Plausible deniability above all else.
- civilized 4y ago
  They punished Tanuja Gupta for raising the issue, to the point where she resigned. https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/googles-caste-bias-problem https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/googles-caste-bias-pr... Google is taking the issue more seriously, but in an evil direction rather than a good one.
throw_a_grenade 4y ago
For those who don't know how to recognise a caste from the name, does anyone have any idea which caste Google's CEO might represent? Can it even be definitely derived just from name?