2 ms·
The difference is Bobby Knight is a human, what I am getting at is people are offended by an algorithm that has no intent, and for all anyone knows could have p
by will_brown 14y ago
The difference is Bobby Knight is a human, what I am getting at is people are offended by an algorithm that has no intent, and for all anyone knows could have picked the word based on another definition that others are over looking.
I just asked the question (I was not advocating or taking a position)and it is clear from the responses most people want to be the first to cast a stone at the algorithm, irrespective of the intent or definition used, that is fine, I am not here to judge.
- jlgreco 14y agoYou know, reading more of the comments here and on the blog, I think Pete Ashton may be right in calling out technological illiteracy. Some people seem to be unable to make a distinction between something said with no ill intent by a human and something said with no ill intent by an algorithm. It really seems to me that this is the result of a failure to properly internalize the full implications of what algorithms are capable of, how they work... really just what they are. You may as well be offended by what a toddler says. It is very very easy for a toddler or an algorithm to say something that could, in other contexts, be offensive. In the correct context however, primarily the realization that there is no intent present, you would have to not understand what a toddler is to be offended by what a toddler says.