Well if you stop reading any time anyone suggests you might have advantages you're not aware of then it's not surprising you don't think you have any advantages.
is it possible to disprove that "AI deepens the way of thinking that is white, male"? I don't think it is for obvious reasons. It's perfectly reasonable to stop reading when you encounter an argument like that.
I remember at the time Gebru basically went into leave until all her complaints were addressed, which can be considered as soft quitting for a company like Google.
There's a funny thing about this claim. These models are now trained by a kind of reinforcement learning with feedback from humans. Who are those humans and where are they?
I don't believe that my "way of thinking" is meaningfully different from the way of thinking of a white person, language and cultural differences accounted for.
Actually, I firmly believe that implying that is profoundly racist. It's small wonder that I see most dangerously racist bullshit being parroted in progressive circles.
The point is that people can treat you differently based on their perception of you, mediated by apparent ethnicity. Your way of thinking doesn't factor in.
> "AI threatens to deepen the dominance of a way of thinking that is white, male,"
This was the claim. And I refuse this notion. The worst atrocities humans inflicted upon one another were derived from a fundamental belief that the "others" being oppressed were meaningfully different from the oppressors, and therefore was ok to oppress them.
And about people treating you differently based on their perception of you, that is a different claim. And that is just basic human nature. Everyone (man or woman, white or black) judges based on appearances, especially when that is the first (and sometimes only) information you have to navigate.
OK I was responding to someone else about their claim that being white had never benefited them. This is an entirely different conversation I don't know why you started it with me. I don't disagree with you so far.
That statement you made seemed reflexively progressive to me rather than an actual thought out position.
Question: why does everything have boil down to a mortality lesson? Why can't white guy from the other thread have a little gripe? What's the purpose of scolding him , telling him that his opinion is wrong, and then treating him like a kid by sending a link to a cartoon that casts him as a snobbish, indifferent, predator?
The comment you replied to was commenting on the same claim I addressed, just on a different perspective (speaking on the lack of perceived advantages).
I fail to see how my reply was misplaced. I'm basically on a subthread commenting on the same claim I chose to address.
> I don't disagree with you so far.
Good. This was a good conversation then. Have an excellent day.
Do you see the problem with your cartoon tutorial. Correct me if I'm wrong but your lesson is a good example of begging the question . I think of the two fallacies, the whipped white guys is not nearly as bad as yours. His is merely anecdotal. Yours rhetorically casts that sad sack as a predatory animal.
They mean to say patriarchy and white supremacy. The fight is against the system. I don't know why so many people don't use better terminology that doesn't exclude allies.
I stopped reading there.
I'm white I'm male I have 0 advantages because of that. Always the same lies everywhere. I'm tired of it.