Re:Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very ...
by londons_explore on Friday April 22, 2022 @01:08PM
(#31124575)
Perhaps certain words disable the feature entirely?
The feature only seems to trigger when it has a suggestion. I can't imagine what suggestion would be suitable to replace the n word.
Re:Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very ...
by AuryGlenz on Friday April 22, 2022 @01:28PM
(#31124936)
We need Clippy back, with webcam functionality. That way he can suggest ending the word in an “a” if you’re black. If you’re not he’ll report you to HR.
Re:Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very ...
by xg15 on Friday April 22, 2022 @01:20PM
(#31124800)
Good point. maybe even Google didn't want to be seen as "hey, here are some suggestions how you can make your speech about murdering Black people more inclusive..."
Re:Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very ...
by throw10920 on Friday April 22, 2022 @03:05PM
(#31126553)
> Edit: Also interesting that this comment is dropping like a stone in HN's comment ranking, even though currently the comment score is at 1. If I accidentally triggered some anti-flame or anti-profanity filter, I'm sorry.
Comment order is a function of both score and age. As far as anybody (except those who actually have access to the source), there's no other "hidden" mechanic.
Re:Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very ...
by politician on Friday April 22, 2022 @03:42PM
(#31127053)
Initial ranking depends on the author's karma. From there, the other factors take over.
Re:Google’s AI-powered ‘inclusive warnings’ feature is very ...
by hrwf82M on Saturday April 23, 2022 @12:34AM
(#31131428)
Because it's not a list of "banned words". It's a list of words or phrases that might accidentally cause offense (apparently similar to some of the entries on the public style guide: https://developers.google.com/style/word-list).
For that role, there's no need to include the n-word, because nobody is going to accidentally put that in a press release.
(Of course, the lists were apparently compiled by total dorks who put in things like "terminate", "dummy variable", and "native". But the list being dumb is a separate issue from it from what you raise).
> A transcribed interview of neo-Nazi and former Klan leader David Duke—in which he uses the N-word and talks about hunting Black people—gets no notes.
Edit: Also interesting that this comment is dropping like a stone in HN's comment ranking, even though currently the comment score is at 1. If I accidentally triggered some anti-flame or anti-profanity filter, I'm sorry.