TehPers

Thanks Obama.

A Few Modest Proposals

If anyone was going into this expecting satire like I was, the article appears not to be satirical.

As depressing as this is, I'm not sure what people were expecting. "Government efficiency" should have been a dead giveaway...

Now Trump just needs to issue a press release talking about how they're streamlining their operations or some BS.

Where I disagree with you is not that the US is bad - the US is terrible, and there is plenty of evidence of that. I don't even disagree with there being censorship in the US. In fact, Trump is objectively a piece of shit who wants nothing more than to become Xi/Putin himself.

What I disagree with is equating censorship in the US with Chinese censorship. I can call Trump a piece of shit online without worrying that the FBI will show up at my door. The models that are trained in the west will happily entertain any (non-violent) political discussions I want. There may be bias, and Trump may be trying to create censorship, but it's not quite to that level yet.

Having personally received the bizarre internal agency emails circulating this week encouraging me to snitch out my colleagues to help root out the evils of DEIA thought in US gov’t the last week has only crystallized it for me.

I am concerned that the US will become as bad as China in terms of censorship, which is part of why I'm trying to leave right now. However, it's not there yet. They are not yet equal, nor are they even close yet.

There’s a strong argument that any consumer facing chatbot AI is “censored”.

If the model is not allowed to spew Nazi propaganda or tell the user to end themselves, that is censorship. Censorship is not automatically bad, but the kind of censorship can make it bad.

This reeks of excluding all nuance to equate two things that are equal only at surface level. You're bad because you punched the other person (ignoring that they stabbed your SO 15 times and kicked your dog across the room).

Chinese state censorship is well researched and extremely well documented. It does not equate to censorship against violent or inappropriate language. It is political censorship.

At best, western models are biased, not politically censored. You can make them say just about anything, but they will bias towards a particular viewpoint. Even if intentional, this is explainable by evaluating their training data, which itself is biased because western society is biased. You are not prevented from personally expressing or even convincing a western model from expressing dissenting political viewpoints.

For some, the law is already unjust (see push to deport legal immigrants, treatment of LGBT+/disabled people by federal law, etc).

Anyway, if Luigi hats are out of stock, you could find a red one instead and say you're his brother or something.

If you're fine with breaking changes now and then, then yes absolutely. I use it everywhere, and it's been a huge boost in productivity for me.

I don't have anything to add to the specific arguments made in the screenshots since I don't personally use AAE (though my wife's family does). I just wanted to clarify that if you have reason not to assume best intentions, then I don't think you should.

I'm just used to a lot of discussions beginning with hostilities these days, and I see it and have to deal with it everywhere. I really just wish that would all stop (not you specifically since I feel there were other instigators in the thread in question), and feel like more reminders can't hurt.

Since I just got out of a discussion that went similar to this off-platform, I guess I'll just share what I wanted to share there:

Discussions go better when there isn't an assumption of hostility from the other side, and where both sides work to understand the emotions and reactions that the other side is having. Think why the other party might be upset. When something upsets you, assume best intentions (unless you have good reason not to), and try to understand both why it upset you and why the other party might think that way.

There is no reason to make enemies of potential allies.

Speaking personally:

Since I grew up around a lot of people speaking AAE in particular, I want to call out that I noticed it mostly tied to income class where I lived, not specifically race or color. For a lot of people who live there, it's the only language they know. The origins are one thing, but it's understandable both why someone would be upset about an appropriated part of their culture, and why somebody would be upset that they're being told they can't use something they've known and which has been a core part of them all their life.

Yes. This behavior seems strange, so either an explanation or investigation by a compiler dev seems like it would be helpful.

Imagine being elected president then just deciding, entirely on your own, that a law (that you helped pass) just shouldn't exist. So much for checks and balances.

FTC learns that the grass is green.

I'd have confidence in them doing something if Lina Khan weren't on her way out. Even if she somehow stuck around, there's no way that random court in Texas is going to let her do her job.