5 ms·

Now your adding something that wasn't ever said or implied about the content being sent over for annotation. Do you actually know this is the type of content th

Now your adding something that wasn't ever said or implied about the content being sent over for annotation. Do you actually know this is the type of content these annotators would likely see, or are you assuming the worst case you can imagine? How do you know it not merely the tedious busy work of putting captions on Getty Images? Boring for sure, but no worse than the time waster worksheets they'd be filling out in 2nd grade. You're making a fairly extreme leap just from the word "annotator". Can you justify it?

CatWChainsaw 4y ago
There is historical precedent with Facebook employing armies of people to review reported content. Sometimes it is somebody abusing the report button because someone said something they didn't like; other times it is child rape. "[The content reviewer] appealed to her manager to see a counselor to help cope after reviewing a disturbing post, footage of a teenage girl being raped by a group of men in the middle of a field with tall grass. The manager did not have an answer, she said. About a week later, she told her there was a counselor available for her talk to, once a quarter." https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/05/12/facebook-content-moderator-ptsd/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/05/12/faceboo... There was even a news story posted here recently about how workers in Nigeria were being paid $2/day to make ChatGPT not a dumpster fire. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34426421 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34426421 So no, it's not a leap of imagination to assume that underpaid and traumatized human labor is used to improve AI, considering that's what it's always been. Honestly, if you work in tech you should know how the sausage is made. After the last six years of the "just asking questions" feigning-ignorance ploy, I'm over it and all who use it.
- IIAOPSW 4y ago
  Top comment in the thread you choose to link me. "To put it in perspective, the average income in Kenya is around $1.25 an hour and tbh (as a Kenyan) I really can't see it as a bad thing. A lot of people here live in abject poverty, they live in situations you can't really begin to imagine. So any sort of help coming our way is good." So right off the bat it is a leap to assume they are underpaid, because those Nigerians were paid just fine when you factor in the purchasing parity and cost of living. This is exactly the sort of opportunity to lift people's station in life that the internet offers. All you need to do that sort of work is a computer and an internet connection, so naturally the work goes to whichever country has the lowest standard of living. Its a transfer of wealth directly from some of the richest people on Earth to some of the poorest, and it provides a valuable service in exchange. Your other example was about moderators not annotators, and about facebook not google. Its tangential and it gives anecdotes rather than data on the "occupational hazard of trauma" in this line of work. So on all counts it fails to support your assumption about the sort of content these annotators in India must be seeing. So to get to the point quickly, the answer is no you aren't actually privy to the startup the GP was talking about and the sort of content they annotate. You have absolutely no idea if its banal stock photos or heinous acts. You are in fact filling in the blanks by assuming the worst and then insisting its a fact. I'm not feigning ignorance, you are imagining less ignorance than you actually have evidence to support! And I've yet to see a good justification for how a job that involves sitting at a computer all day could possibly be a "sweatshop", child labor or not.
  - CatWChainsaw 4y ago
    If you're splitting hairs about underpaying, TFA includes "minimum wage" in the title; so unless you plan to feign ignorance about the fact that minimum wage didn't keep up with inflation and hasn't been a living wage in years, then yes, underpaid. If you're splitting hairs about moderators vs annotators, and whether their work is traumatizing, also from TFA: “The one I’ve been seeing the most lately are the suicide forums,” he said. “‘What’s the best method to hang myself if I’m 5’9”?’ ‘What length rope should I use?’” And “There are times that I have seen some of the graphic content replayed in my dreams. This is why I never work late at night anymore." If it's some monotony:trauma ratio you're quibbling about, name your price. You are feigning ignorance because you are deliberately looking a trend in the face and justifying it and saying it's impossible to make a generalization from data points; the very thing researchers are trying to get AI to do.

CatWChainsaw 4y ago

There is historical precedent with Facebook employing armies of people to review reported content. Sometimes it is somebody abusing the report button because someone said something they didn't like; other times it is child rape. "[The content reviewer] appealed to her manager to see a counselor to help cope after reviewing a disturbing post, footage of a teenage girl being raped by a group of men in the middle of a field with tall grass. The manager did not have an answer, she said. About a week later, she told her there was a counselor available for her talk to, once a quarter." https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/05/12/facebook-content-moderator-ptsd/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/05/12/faceboo... There was even a news story posted here recently about how workers in Nigeria were being paid $2/day to make ChatGPT not a dumpster fire. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34426421 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34426421 So no, it's not a leap of imagination to assume that underpaid and traumatized human labor is used to improve AI, considering that's what it's always been. Honestly, if you work in tech you should know how the sausage is made. After the last six years of the "just asking questions" feigning-ignorance ploy, I'm over it and all who use it.

IIAOPSW 4y ago
Top comment in the thread you choose to link me. "To put it in perspective, the average income in Kenya is around $1.25 an hour and tbh (as a Kenyan) I really can't see it as a bad thing. A lot of people here live in abject poverty, they live in situations you can't really begin to imagine. So any sort of help coming our way is good." So right off the bat it is a leap to assume they are underpaid, because those Nigerians were paid just fine when you factor in the purchasing parity and cost of living. This is exactly the sort of opportunity to lift people's station in life that the internet offers. All you need to do that sort of work is a computer and an internet connection, so naturally the work goes to whichever country has the lowest standard of living. Its a transfer of wealth directly from some of the richest people on Earth to some of the poorest, and it provides a valuable service in exchange. Your other example was about moderators not annotators, and about facebook not google. Its tangential and it gives anecdotes rather than data on the "occupational hazard of trauma" in this line of work. So on all counts it fails to support your assumption about the sort of content these annotators in India must be seeing. So to get to the point quickly, the answer is no you aren't actually privy to the startup the GP was talking about and the sort of content they annotate. You have absolutely no idea if its banal stock photos or heinous acts. You are in fact filling in the blanks by assuming the worst and then insisting its a fact. I'm not feigning ignorance, you are imagining less ignorance than you actually have evidence to support! And I've yet to see a good justification for how a job that involves sitting at a computer all day could possibly be a "sweatshop", child labor or not.
- CatWChainsaw 4y ago
  If you're splitting hairs about underpaying, TFA includes "minimum wage" in the title; so unless you plan to feign ignorance about the fact that minimum wage didn't keep up with inflation and hasn't been a living wage in years, then yes, underpaid. If you're splitting hairs about moderators vs annotators, and whether their work is traumatizing, also from TFA: “The one I’ve been seeing the most lately are the suicide forums,” he said. “‘What’s the best method to hang myself if I’m 5’9”?’ ‘What length rope should I use?’” And “There are times that I have seen some of the graphic content replayed in my dreams. This is why I never work late at night anymore." If it's some monotony:trauma ratio you're quibbling about, name your price. You are feigning ignorance because you are deliberately looking a trend in the face and justifying it and saying it's impossible to make a generalization from data points; the very thing researchers are trying to get AI to do.