2 ms·

None of that makes any sense whatsoever. In your hypothetical scenario where "the numbers balance out," that's by definition indiscriminate termination. You can

None of that makes any sense whatsoever. In your hypothetical scenario where "the numbers balance out," that's by definition indiscriminate termination. You can't discriminate without it showing up in the numbers because that's how math works. It's also offensive that you accuse me of fallaciously bringing up an unrelated story. You said the "tweets all seem extremely reasonable," including the one where Kling viciously defended DHH's call for ethnic cleansing in London. There is no "backstory" here.

s1artibartfast 13d ago
Then we have different definitions. Discrimination is a matter of bias and motive. Statistics are irrelevant. For some definitions of systemic discrimination, you may look for an effect, but even that doesn't rule out two way discrimination. If a black person is lynched by a racist for their skin color, and a white person is lynched by a racist for their skin color, there is still a hell of a lot of discriminatory behavior happening. If you personally hold that events themselves cannot be discriminatory, even if they are motivated by racial bias or malice, you will continually run into disagreement with others. The overwhelming majority of people and legal systems recognize that events can be discriminatory. If you fire someone and provide their skin color as the reason, you will lose that discrimination lawsuit in every state in the US, no matter your statistical fetish.
- soraminazuki 13d ago
  Statistical fetish? That's one hell of a way to turn your lack of proof into an ad hominem attack. If people are being fired for being white and male, then the number of unemployed white men increases compared to other demographics. It's that simple.
  - s1artibartfast 13d ago
    oh come on, at least try to engage with what I said. drop the covo into your llm of choice and see what it thinks
s1artibartfast 13d ago
PS, I dont see anything I would call vicious, any mention of london, or any mention of ethnic cleansing
- soraminazuki 13d ago
  The tweet clearly mentions that Kling "stands with @dhh" citing backlash against his "racist and transphobic views." You called that "extremely reasonable" and you should own it.

s1artibartfast 13d ago

Then we have different definitions. Discrimination is a matter of bias and motive. Statistics are irrelevant. For some definitions of systemic discrimination, you may look for an effect, but even that doesn't rule out two way discrimination. If a black person is lynched by a racist for their skin color, and a white person is lynched by a racist for their skin color, there is still a hell of a lot of discriminatory behavior happening. If you personally hold that events themselves cannot be discriminatory, even if they are motivated by racial bias or malice, you will continually run into disagreement with others. The overwhelming majority of people and legal systems recognize that events can be discriminatory. If you fire someone and provide their skin color as the reason, you will lose that discrimination lawsuit in every state in the US, no matter your statistical fetish.

soraminazuki 13d ago
Statistical fetish? That's one hell of a way to turn your lack of proof into an ad hominem attack. If people are being fired for being white and male, then the number of unemployed white men increases compared to other demographics. It's that simple.
- s1artibartfast 13d ago
  oh come on, at least try to engage with what I said. drop the covo into your llm of choice and see what it thinks

s1artibartfast 13d ago

PS, I dont see anything I would call vicious, any mention of london, or any mention of ethnic cleansing

soraminazuki 13d ago
The tweet clearly mentions that Kling "stands with @dhh" citing backlash against his "racist and transphobic views." You called that "extremely reasonable" and you should own it.