fixermark

8 ms·

31.
by fixermark 7y ago
> It can't be too much longer now. That's really unclear. Users' behavior regarding their own personal data and their claims of privacy expectations seem to deviate pretty significantly. I once nearly sold a company loyalt
32.
by fixermark 7y ago
Such cross-contamination, when done maliciously, is called "push-polling" and is a known tactic for shaping political discourse by taking advantage of being possibly the first to mention a topic in a person's field-of-view to
33.
by fixermark 7y ago
Yep. In short, "Keyservers Are Dying" (because they are a technology with known exploit vectors that never caught on strongly enough to get the critical mass of volunteer contributors to patch the issues).
34.
by fixermark 7y ago
This article itself could use a 2018 tag (does that make it part of the old web? ;) ).
35.
by fixermark 8y ago
When an opinion---any opinion, including religious---crosses the line into political action, it becomes an action that can have impact on other people. At that point, the people very much have a say regarding the consequences. The intersect
36.
by fixermark 8y ago
In most of the US, political affiliation isn't a protected class. There are good reasons this is true; as a country, we generally (a) recognize a difference between private social or economic pressure and censure and legal sanctions or
37.
by fixermark 8y ago
Right, but it's not appropriate for Google's AI ethics board. It runs counter to the corporate ethos, and that ethos of course has weight on the counsel they retain.
38.
by fixermark 8y ago
To be honest, I am sad to say I have yet to meet a gay person for whom that advice would be necessary or helpful, as they already know; the tradeoff between fitting in and expressing one's inner life openly is something those I've
39.
by fixermark 8y ago
"Whataboutism" is a common way to derail a topic and, carried to its limit, suggests that all action is equally futile because there's always some more worthy cause. I have transgender, transsexual, and transvestite friends w
40.
by fixermark 8y ago
I'd personally be really cautious about making the mistake of conflating Damore with other topics. Damore, in particular, was fired legally because there are, in fact, some topics not up for discussion ( https://www.wired.com
41.
by fixermark 8y ago
I think you're taking as assumption that the vast majority of people are arguing in good faith, and many are no longer willing to take on that assumption without evidence. Given what has been seen regarding both 4chan psychological ope
42.
by fixermark 8y ago
I'm speaking loosely, but by "valid" here I just mean "a full person with human dignity and value." James' Heritage Foundation has come out strongly in favor of the Trump administration's attempts to ban t
43.
by fixermark 8y ago
I think the trees are really significant here because the other commenters are trying to generalize an instance that can't be generalized without discarding significant details. To give a concrete example of how that over-generalizatio
44.
by fixermark 8y ago
These topics matter for a Google AI board. Google uses machine learning for information classification and filtering, and they've had issues in the past with over-broad or misapplication. "Why Has 'Transgender' Become a
45.
by fixermark 8y ago
I think you're confusing my personal viewpoint with my observation on what Google appears to have done in this specific context. But for what it's worth, in the specific question of trans individuals, my personal view point is tha
46.
by fixermark 8y ago
my opinion on this topic is irrelevant. But Google's opinion on who is on Google's AI ethics board matters very much, and it appears some things are settled questions for Google. Such as the humanity and dignity of trans individua
47.
by fixermark 8y ago
No, because not all ethical view points are equivalent or interchangeable. And we're not talking about any old ethics board, we're talking about an ethics board at Google, which goes out of its way to be trans inclusive.
48.
by fixermark 8y ago
Google hires people they intend never to fire. Losing 2,000 employees would be pretty damaging to the company. Another concern is the impact that losing 2,000 activist employees would have on their growth plans, because they hire from colle
49.
by fixermark 8y ago
If the 20% can't speak out without creating a hostile work environment, then no, they probably should not speak out. The devil doesn't need nearly as many advocates as it gets. ... And your implied comparison of Google's tran
50.
by fixermark 8y ago
The error you're making in trading off a bit more discomfort for an already-marginalized group against any discomfort for the mainstream is exactly the reason having someone in an AI ethics board who doesn't see being a trans pers
51.
by fixermark 8y ago
I'm underwhelmed. In this specific example, the individual in question could've gotten out ahead of the press cycle and explained herself. That she didn't means the beliefs she holds as reported probably are her beliefs, and
52.
by fixermark 8y ago
I'd actually push this thought one step further: most tech degrees require between zero and one course of ethics over a full college program. The people we trust to make the technical decisions are under-trained in making those decisio
53.
by fixermark 8y ago
Not if you apply the point-of-view that etiquette is what the unethical use to keep their unethical practices under-questioned.
54.
by fixermark 8y ago
The paper is part of the SIGBOVIK "conference" that takes intentionally funny computer science papers (of varying degrees of rigor) every year. This paper is in good company alongside "Aumann agreement by combat", "
55.
by fixermark 8y ago
They may not be able to prevent it without refusing to exfiltrate that data. But then they maintained clear resopnsibility (at the cost of usability) for the user's data. Excellent example though, because it highlights a real joint-own
56.
by fixermark 8y ago
Not at all; they'd be responsible for bundling that data in a well-defined format into a blob of some kind that the user can request be exfiltrated (after providing their credentials to authenticate the request). The third-party would
57.
by fixermark 8y ago
Unfortunately, Facebook had a fundamental misunderstanding of how privacy has to work, and their users will be paying for their error for years. If it's earth-shatteringly bad for your users if their private data is leaked by a third
58.
by fixermark 8y ago
The Applebook metaphor in the article breaks down because data is infinitely copyable. It's actually costing less than nothing for this hypothetical "Applebook" to store (copies of) my apples: if there's a disaster back
59.
by fixermark 8y ago
How easily, and how much setup is necessary? Remember, we're talking about competing with a service that doesn't even make the end-user consider whether that is a problem that needs to be solved (just plug in a credit card and off
60.
by fixermark 8y ago
I don't think it would, unless it begins playing within thirty seconds of the user choosing a video and provides an uninterrupted streaming experience? Last I checked, the BitTorrent protocol didn't provide packet sorting that wou

More ›