
Saying “All Lives Matter” to Siri Now Redirects You to Blacklivesmatter.com - admiralspoo
https://www.imore.com/saying-all-lives-matter-siri-now-redirects-you-blacklivesmattercom
======
rvz
One of the greatest things in a democratic society is the right to protest
about issues like this, which is very good for a healthy debate.

However when Tim Cook defended the decision to side with China and to censor
and suppress the pro-democracy protestors in Hong Kong [1] and then support
this one, it is quite extraordinary for this double standards from Apple to
pick and choose their causes when both are exercising their right to protest
against an injustice.

A very hypocritical one-sided stance from Apple.

[0] [https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/03/apple-bans-app-used-
by-...](https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/03/apple-bans-app-used-by-hong-kong-
protestors/)

[1] [https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/11/tim-cook-defends-
remova...](https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/11/tim-cook-defends-removal-
hkmaplive-from-app-store/)

~~~
ponker
It's not hypocritical at all, they don't need anything from Alabama rednecks,
they do need the support of the Chinese government. The consistent principle
behind both decisions is "Look out for Number One"

~~~
Infernal
Hey you never know, one of those Alabama rednecks could grow up to be the CEO
of Apple one day!

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Cook#Early_life_and_educat...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Cook#Early_life_and_education)

~~~
malandrew
The irony of the comment you're responding to could not be more perfect.

~~~
Infernal
My greatest fear in responding was that I’d somehow manage not to fully
capture it.

~~~
sonofgod
#nailedit

------
armatav
I feel like your technology should be simply a set of tools that assist you.

If you’re a “bad” person, logically your technology should help you be bad.

And if you’re good, the same.

But never would I want my technology to inform me what is good or bad, or
permit me one path over the other. That is my decision as the human in the
relationship.

~~~
eyelidlessness
Technology is never neutral. It always reflects the biases of its creators,
and of the social environment in which it's developed. Those biases may
directly contradict the goals you expressed. For example, if self-driving car
technology has racist biases, a "good" person may still end up on the inside
of a car that chooses an escape route with a pedestrian of color in its path
over an escape route which has no pedestrians.

Neutrality is a myth. Actively promoting values and challenging biases is
preferable. You don't have to agree with the values promoted, and you're
welcome to choose not to use the technology.

~~~
armatav
Your Siri unit should not be altering your commands.

It is that simple.

~~~
eyelidlessness
It does all the time. It has since before it was acquired by Apple.

~~~
armatav
This is a deliberate blacklisting of a command based on a political agenda.

Technology is built in service to mankind.

~~~
eyelidlessness
"Black lives matter" is not a political agenda, it is explicitly a service to
mankind.

~~~
Amezarak
This is a fantastic demonstration of what Zizek means when he talks about
modern ideology.

> _For subjects to believe in an ideology, it must have been presented to
> them, and been accepted, as non-ideological indeed, as True and Right, and
> what anyone sensible would believe. As we shall see in 2e, Žižek is alert to
> the realist insight that there is no more effective political gesture than
> to declare some contestable matter above political contestation. Just as the
> third way is said to be post-ideological or national security is claimed to
> be extra-political, so Žižek argues that ideologies are always presented by
> their proponents as being discourses about Things too sacred to profane by
> politics. Hence, Žižek’s bold opening in The Sublime Object of Ideology is
> to claim that today ideology has not so much disappeared from the political
> landscape as come into its own. It is exactly because of this success, Žižek
> argues, that ideology has also been able to be dismissed in accepted
> political and theoretical opinion._

[https://www.iep.utm.edu/zizek/#Ha](https://www.iep.utm.edu/zizek/#Ha)

I think it's actually fairly concerning that the fault lines between
ideologies seems to be deepening - people seemed more and more convinced that
their positions are absolutely not even contestable. I'm not sure where there
is room for civil political discourse and positive change in this kind of
scenario.

~~~
armatav
Yep - exactly right, I shouldn’t have responded to it - I knew it was coming
from the top level post.

That thought process is absolutely poisonous for technology - it’s like a
viral brain-lock.

------
0898
"All Lives Matter" is Racism 1.0 thinking.

But Racism 2.0 has been pushed out and – in some ways – it's a forced upgrade.

Racism 1.0 was widely understood: racists were bad people who made monkey
chants on football terraces. It was "the nice people" vs "the mean people". If
we "raised awareness", maybe one day it would be "stamped out".

Racism 2.0 is more complex.

It's structural and systemic, so for the first time a lot of of white
progressives are discovering that we're part of the problem. Saying "I don't
see colour" is suddenly the wrong thing to say. For a long time it was the
correct thing to say and think.

People are having to re-learn stuff they thought they already knew and not
everybody is thrilled.

Worse, Racism 2.0 is closed source. The code isn't really published anywhere,
at least not in simple language. You have to kind of piece it together
yourself from lists of "resources" thrown together by activists, some of whom
have opaque agendas.

It's not as simple as it used to be, and it's not surprising that some people
are confused.

~~~
downerending
We were recently asked by management to stop using the words _whitelist_ and
_blacklist_ , as they are seen as being "hurtful". No real idea how to react
to that, given that they are terms of art (and of course, were never any sort
of reference to race).

I suppose it's pretty much like most management edicts that come down over
time. Just nod your head, keep your mouth shut, and with any luck it will all
blow over in a month or two.

~~~
ponker
I think a lot of this goes too far, but I do agree with whitelist and
blacklist. In all aspects of our lives we use "white" to describe things that
are good and "black" to describe things that are bad. That movie is "dark." It
has a "black-hearted" villain.

While that phenomenon does not have its origin in racism, I do think it
reinforces it. I've moved to allow-list and block-list on my company's
recommendation. I only remember to do it about 50% of the time, so I'm glad
that it's not being policed, but rather a constructive suggestion.

~~~
mc32
Ok what about your balance sheet being in the black? Should that be
neutralized too?

I think it’s going too far. If you want to do something for people go out and
help them. Devote time to kids, provide mentorship, etc. This other
superficial stuff only satisfies misguided activists and does nothing for
affected kids.

Here’s the thing. It’s easy to find someone or something to pillory. It’s time
consuming and hard to get on the ground and help. People love “showing” how
good they are, but rarely act on it in real life with hard effort —that’s too
much work.

As Zizek says, what happens the day after (the revolution)? Everyone is
enamored with the effervescence or revolution being the good guys... but no
one wants to do the hard work. Everyone’s life has to go on when you get back
to reality.

~~~
ljm
I generally don't like the way these discussions play out because there is
plenty of vocabulary we've changed over time when it becomes less palatable to
the contemporary taste. It's easy to pull out all of the more innocent
examples of the word while ignoring the perspective of those who don't
appreciate it.

There are definitely instances of taking it too far, and they tend to be the
ones that get disproportionate attention because they generate easy outrage.
But in all honesty, if what we're seeing happen right now is progress towards
a fairer society, I'd rather not stand in the way of it just because I'm used
to having 'master' as my main branch on git, and I'd prefer to have the people
most directly affected make their voice heard on this kind of thing.

~~~
mc32
So no “maître d'” no “maistro”, “meister” either... or is there a line
somewhere?

Am I not my dogs master? I mean, of course it should not be used to show
relationships between people, but relationships between things or people and
animals, I don’t see an issue.

~~~
ljm
I don't think reductio ad absurdum is an appropriate reaction. Nobody is
banning those words wholesale.

~~~
mc32
Of course no one can ban a word. Words exist independently of any authority...
that said, it’s not an absurd proposition to think people will want to control
those words for their own reasons. I don’t think my examples are a stretch
given that it’s a stretch to tie conceptual data relationships to human
relationships and see something untowards in it.

Do we change the name for “Slavic” people too because it harkens back to their
history where Slavs were the default slave people in Western Europe and the
origin of the word’s English meaning?

If anything, Slavs would have a point as it unfairly defaults them as being
slaves etymologically.

~~~
ljm
I might well be wrong but this kind of authority over the use of language
seems to be much more US-specific than I've seen elsewhere, which you could
attribute to the overall dominance of US people in the places where these
discussions tend to crop up (github, HN, Reddit, Twitter, Tumblr, etc.).

I don't really know what to make of it except that these discussions about not
using 'master', 'cop', etc. seem _heavily_ biased to the US perspective and
current affairs in the US. I can understand it taking place due to the sheer
cultural upheaval that has (quite frankly) been a long time coming, but my
mild frustration about `US === the whole wide world` can take a step aside
while we focus on the injustices fellow humans face.

------
durnygbur
I'm really tired of this American centric hysteria. The world doesn't care.
Please resolve this domestically.

Yes I'm aware of the Atlantic slave trade - it was despicable and shameful.

~~~
falcolas
America isn't the only place that the Atlantic slave trade occurred. It's not
the only place where blacks (and others, like Muslims) have been/are
persecuted in greater numbers than the "indigenous" populations.

~~~
durnygbur
> It's not the only place where blacks (and others, like Muslims)

Ever heard of Arab slave trade?

~~~
falcolas
Hence my attempt (perhaps insufficient) to not say that "only" Black lives
matter in this case. I'm also not infering that the BLM movement has been
saying anything like that in the first place.

~~~
dependenttypes
Arab slave trade does not refer to arabs being slaves but rather to people
from north africa, south europe, and eastern europe being traded - so,
caucasians.

~~~
durnygbur
Yes - Arabs (predominantly Muslims) are responsible for slave trade comparable
in magnitude to Atlantic slave trade.

------
throw7
Oh Tim... I beseech thee, please stop with your divine virtue signaling from
upon high.

------
mlang23
Wikipedia says there has been a poll in august 2015 regarding ALM. And "78% of
likely American voters said that the statement All Lives Matter was "close[r]
to [their] own" point of view than was Black Lives Matter.

Yet, everyone seems to agree that ALM is now a racist move? I am racist if I
believe that all people should be treated equally? Those that utter the phrase
are accused of subtly trying to transport a message which is anti-black? The
longer I read about it, the more I hate identity politics. If I honestly
believe that BLM is to restricted a phrase, I am now being accused of being
racist because I dont explicitly support BLM? This is madness. Why do
activists persue radical and extremist paths which eventually reduces the
support they get from the political middle?

~~~
scamper
I’ll assume you’re not intentionally misunderstanding ALM vs. BLM. ALM is the
base assumption that we all agree with. But imagine if we were in our happy
ALM world, but “B” kept getting shat on. BLM is a response to that, to say,
“Hey, BLM too!” If it helps, think of it as an asterisk. “*BLM too.” BLM is
not exclusive, it’s an interjection.

Also, these thoughts aren’t mine (though they were obvious to me from the
start), they’re fully Googleable.

~~~
mlang23
No, I am not intentionally misunderstanding something. How do you even do
that?

But I still done get the word wrestling. From my POV, ALM is not exclusive.
But if someone accuses me of being racist just because I am using a phrase
that has somehow been declared unwanted by a select few, all they are
achieving is that they reduce my willingness to support their rallies.

Language police is horrible. I know it from first hand. I am blind. And since
about 10 years or so, I notice that more and more people feel like they are
not allowed to use the word blind while I am around. It is pretty clear why
they do that. They are afraid of stepping on someones toes and being shunted
for that. Now, all that has been achieved by this is that people feel more
awkward around me, because they no longer know how to talk about my condition.
They find all sorts of phrases to make sure they never mention the supposedly
bad word. However, fuck it, I AM BLIND. Policing the language does not improve
my situation at all. In fact, it worsens it.

------
SpicyLemonZest
This is extremely concerning. People's hardware should not be remotely edited
to broadcast political slogans, even if this particular slogan is a good one.

~~~
yawaramin
People are free to not use Apple hardware.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
I don't think that really mitigates the concern. If my microwave started
saying "support our troops!", I wouldn't be comforted by the fact that I can
throw it out and get a different one.

~~~
arilotter
But your microwave doesn't connect to an online service that you don't pay
for. Nobody is forcing you to use Siri, or any of Apple's online services.
It's more similar to a website you use saying "support our troops." If you
don't like using an always-online constantly updated service, then you have
the option to not use it. You pay for the convenience of Siri's knowledge and
functionality by giving up any control over how the system responds and acts.
You can always turn your internet connection off when you use Siri, and thus
only use it for things like playing and pausing music.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
Well, it doesn't yet. I suppose my smart refrigerator would have been a better
example. As more and more components of our lives get a screen and Wifi
connection, we're going to need better norms than "online services can do
whatever they want".

