slg

60 ms·

871.
by slg 2y ago
Ok, I personally don't have a problem with any employer having a rule of "don't be an asshole."
872.
by slg 2y ago
Calling the man "Muhammad Ali" didn't mean you had to convert to the Nation of Islam. Just call someone what they want to be called. You can do that without any endorsement of the reason behind their request. A "diffe
873.
by slg 2y ago
I personally don't have a problem with any site having a rule of "don't be an asshole on our platform." It's the first rule of this site, for example.
874.
by slg 2y ago
You're overcomplicating it. As I said, "You don't have to turn this into some ideological battle." Someone asked the tiniest favor of you, simply refer to them how they want to be referred, and you said no. That goes b
875.
by slg 2y ago
>But also, "misgendering people" is a point of political dispute. If I ask you to call me Bill and you keep calling me William, you're an asshole. I don't know how misgendering people is any different. Just call peo
876.
by slg 2y ago
>Your first comment - the one that started all this - was, as far as I can understand, arguing that this feature indicated that Google had the capabilities to do more advanced - understanding? processing? meaning analysis? - than it had
877.
by slg 2y ago
>Again, I don't see it. CCs are not content agnostic: they have to have semantic understanding of the words said in order to produce accurate results. How do you think CCs differentiate between the words "to", "too&qu
878.
by slg 2y ago
That depends on how the transcription software is written. Are swear words filtered out or are they just never in the system's vocabulary in the first place? I assumed the latter, but fair enough point. It is possible my categorizatio
879.
by slg 2y ago
>Running .includes() on the client does not imply that Google has any "understanding" of what was said. It only implies that they ran .includes() on the client. includes() does not "understand" anything. Do you want t
880.
by slg 2y ago
It isn’t about this requiring “deep analysis work”. It is the difference between some analysis and no analysis. That increase from 0 to 1 is always the biggest hurdle to clear when it comes to any corporate behavior like this. This feature
881.
by slg 2y ago
Ironically you seem to be focusing too much on the exact words and phrases I used rather than the deeper meaning. So let's just get completely away from words like "knows" and "understanding" which seem to be tripp
882.
by slg 2y ago
>...but given a manual transcription... youtube definitely had the capability to do exactly this... I mean the "given a manual transcription" condition means the very much didn't have "the capability to do exactly t
883.
by slg 2y ago
Now this is just a semantic debate about whether a computer can even "understand" anything. The system is conditionally responding based upon the content of what was said. That indicates a level of sophistication in analyzing th
884.
by slg 2y ago
I don't know why you quoted this snippet to ask this question when I addressed it literally in the next sentence of my original comment, but I guess I need to reiterate it. Automatic transcripts/ closed captioning suggest Google
885.
by slg 2y ago
>How else do you think the "up next" and "recommended videos for you" feature works? Did you think they were serving up relevant videos purely out of chance? It is absolutely possible to serve recommendations in a con
886.
by slg 2y ago
I know this is just a fun little easter egg, but features like this seems a little risky to me. It calls attention to the fact that Youtube isn't just serving me videos neutrally, it knows what is being said in those videos at the exa
887.
by slg 2y ago
It really is one of the more effective ways to identify a bubble when companies shift to selling themselves on the tools and technology they use rather than the problem they are solving.
888.
by slg 2y ago
>What I do NOT believe is that the Social Security number just sort of came about and started being used by government services such as the IRS without anyone being responsible for that huge organizational decision or the initial (curren
889.
by slg 2y ago
"Plausible deniability" was the key phrase in my original comment. A one off person abusing the system (before the Google purchase) or Google executives recognizing that "[Youtube] is completely sustained by pirated content.
890.
by slg 2y ago
This is neither a problem of funding or any government service being at fault. This is the fault of American culture. A national ID system sounds too scary to too many Americans. Politicians aren't going to waste their political cap
891.
by slg 2y ago
If you look into the case, this wasn't a situation in which they accidentally hosted pirated content as a byproduct of hosting legitimate content. There are records of internal communication of the business discussing how to encourage
892.
by slg 2y ago
> Before the Cuban missile crisis you wouldn't have seen a path to nuclear war. During the crisis you probably wouldn't have seen a path. Come on, people couldn't see a path to nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis
893.
by slg 2y ago
During the Cuban Missile Crisis the US dropped depth charges in the vicinity of the Soviet submarine B-59. This was meant as a sign to surface, but it was interpreted by the sub as an attack suggesting war had already broken out. The Sovi
894.
by slg 2y ago
>It's a big boardwalk feature at a high-profile park and sees hundreds of visitors a day with vanishingly rare incident. It is also important to consider the context of the park itself. Roughly half of the world's known geyser
895.
by slg 2y ago
One or more nuclear powers has been at war for basically the entire nuclear era. They have all had wars in which they have "lost more troops than in any war since WWII". Even if this is the end of the Putin regime, this wouldn&#
896.
by slg 2y ago
Maybe we aren't at 0 warning at the moment, but if there is a spectrum from 0 warning to imminent, we are close enough to 0 that the distinction doesn't really matter. The US, UK, and China are not actively fighting in Ukraine and
897.
by slg 2y ago
That is assuming nuclear war breaks out with zero warning. There is usually a build up to wars that could involve ramping up production of a nuclear arsenal before any nuclear weapons are actually used.
898.
by slg 2y ago
> paying fines rarely, if ever, causes these too-big-to-fail corporations to materially impact them. That means the fines aren’t big enough. They should probably be scaled according to the business’ revenue.
899.
by slg 2y ago
People are alway going to make bad decisions. Sometimes that is out of a lack of experience or knowledge which can be fixed by better training (which also requires money). Other times it is out of apathy, laziness, or something else that c
900.
by slg 2y ago
No two people are incompetent in exactly the same way. Hiring two developers to review each other's code leads to better code because they will often find problems that the other one didn't see. In a well managed organization (a

More ›