Comments on: "Did you mean adoption?"

Comments on: "Did you mean adoption?" http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243 A Rare Bird, A Strange Duck, One Funky Blog Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:52:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Res Ipsa Loquitur » 2006 » March » 22 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-40093 Res Ipsa Loquitur » 2006 » March » 22 Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:32:04 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-40093 [...] A fun discussion regarding one of my my recent posts has broken out. [...] [...] A fun discussion regarding one of my my recent posts has broken out. [...]]]> By: Prescription Drugs http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9352 Prescription Drugs Tue, 04 Apr 2006 00:09:18 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9352 I am looking for message board posters about prescription drugs, conditions, and disorders. Feel free to post at my board and plug your blog in your signature file. See ya. By: Funky Dung http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9218 Funky Dung Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:35:15 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9218 I'm well aware of the whining on both sides. I still think you're pretty wacked if you're offended by the mere suggestion of adoption. Even if the prompt was intentional, why in the world would anybody be offended? Does anyone actually think abortion is the ideal choice in all cases?!? What ever happened to "safe, legal, and rare"? <blockquote>"it’s no more asinine to see a substantive bias in the automated prompts of a search engine than it is to see a substantive bias in the decision of the company to change the prompts."</blockquote> I agree. offended by the mere suggestion of adoption. Even if the prompt was intentional, why in the world would anybody be offended? Does anyone actually think abortion is the ideal choice in all cases?!? What ever happened to "safe, legal, and rare"?

"it’s no more asinine to see a substantive bias in the automated prompts of a search engine than it is to see a substantive bias in the decision of the company to change the prompts."

I agree.]]> By: Peter http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9108 Peter Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:00:32 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9108 It's not asinine if you recognize that there is a polarized debate out there, with each side trying to sneak its influence into myriad media moments, where one of those sides would certainly advocate suggesting adoption to anyone who considers abortion and the other side would probably not. Considering the shrill whining on both sides (even yours) and the numerous apparent attempts by proponents of both views to hijack the minds of the nation to force them into an all-or-nothing proposition, I don't find it remotely unreasonable that someone would detect a bias there. Both sides of the abortion controversy have couched themselves in such a way that everyone understands what they believe victory would look like: complete suppression of all discourse on the matter and unswerving legal enforcement of one side or the other. So long as the debate remains as shrill and vicious as it is, even appearing to take one side or the other will probably be bad for business with respect to one segment of the population. Or, to put it another way, it's no more asinine to see a substantive bias in the automated prompts of a search engine than it is to see a substantive bias in the decision of the company to change the prompts. both sides (even yours) and the numerous apparent attempts by proponents of both views to hijack the minds of the nation to force them into an all-or-nothing proposition, I don't find it remotely unreasonable that someone would detect a bias there.

Both sides of the abortion controversy have couched themselves in such a way that everyone understands what they believe victory would look like: complete suppression of all discourse on the matter and unswerving legal enforcement of one side or the other. So long as the debate remains as shrill and vicious as it is, even appearing to take one side or the other will probably be bad for business with respect to one segment of the population.

Or, to put it another way, it's no more asinine to see a substantive bias in the automated prompts of a search engine than it is to see a substantive bias in the decision of the company to change the prompts.]]> By: Funky Dung http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9107 Funky Dung Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:32:07 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9107 <blockquote>"I tried to allude to why a person could reasonably be offended by that prompt in my responsive comment"</blockquote> I was trying to point out that, technological glitch aside, being offended by the suggestion of "adoption" when you type "abortion" is asinine. "I tried to allude to why a person could reasonably be offended by that prompt in my responsive comment"

I was trying to point out that, technological glitch aside, being offended by the suggestion of "adoption" when you type "abortion" is asinine.]]> By: Peter http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9100 Peter Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:01:45 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9100 <blockquote>BTW, I’ve missed your comments round here, Peter.</blockquote> Thank you. I have missed participating. However, I find that I can easily kill half of my day writing blog entries or engaging in discussions. If I want to maintain myself in school, I simply can't do that — particularly here, where responses to and from Jerry and Steve can consume hours and hours of time. Someday I'll just have to pitch to a publisher for a book deal so I can have my say to my heart's content. Until then, furtive posts to my blog and infrequent comments to others' will have to suffice. BTW, I’ve missed your comments round here, Peter.

Thank you. I have missed participating. However, I find that I can easily kill half of my day writing blog entries or engaging in discussions. If I want to maintain myself in school, I simply can't do that — particularly here, where responses to and from Jerry and Steve can consume hours and hours of time.

Someday I'll just have to pitch to a publisher for a book deal so I can have my say to my heart's content. Until then, furtive posts to my blog and infrequent comments to others' will have to suffice.]]> By: Peter http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9099 Peter Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:27:56 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9099 I tried to allude to why a person could reasonably be offended by that prompt in my responsive comment: "...the system, which, although it operates without direct human supervision in the decisions such as the one described above, does operate under the auspices of human control..." People like you or I are clearly able to tell when we are dealing with simulated intelligence. Other people (perhaps most people) are not so good at it, particularly when they are dealing with corporations (be it Amazon.com or any other), against whom individual citizens tend to construe conspiracy theories with vigor equal to that by which they sling them at the government. Considering that most people are not aware of how complex computer systems work (and, as the systems get more complex, there will be even more people who understand less and less), I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect that they will be confused or even offended by some of the responses those systems generate. Thus the comment at the end of my original post, "Welcome to the age of miscommunication between people and software." One tends to say "welcome" at the beginning of something, and I suspect that this is only the beginning of such problems. I foresee a time when software used by corporations will face legal status not dissimilar to that of employees, when software miscommunication will be just as important a management issue as employee customer-service skills.
"…the system, which, although it operates without direct human supervision in the decisions such as the one described above, does operate under the auspices of human control…"

People like you or I are clearly able to tell when we are dealing with simulated intelligence. Other people (perhaps most people) are not so good at it, particularly when they are dealing with corporations (be it Amazon.com or any other), against whom individual citizens tend to construe conspiracy theories with vigor equal to that by which they sling them at the government.

Considering that most people are not aware of how complex computer systems work (and, as the systems get more complex, there will be even more people who understand less and less), I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect that they will be confused or even offended by some of the responses those systems generate.

Thus the comment at the end of my original post, "Welcome to the age of miscommunication between people and software." One tends to say "welcome" at the beginning of something, and I suspect that this is only the beginning of such problems. I foresee a time when software used by corporations will face legal status not dissimilar to that of employees, when software miscommunication will be just as important a management issue as employee customer-service skills.]]> By: Funky Dung http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9098 Funky Dung Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:26:17 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9098 BTW, I've missed your comments round here, Peter. :) ]]> By: Funky Dung http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9097 Funky Dung Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:16:58 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9097 I did not mean to imply that you had ome down on either side of the controversy in this instance, and yet you have responded as though I had. Most interesting. ;) I will edit this post to replace "you" with "one". This is a genuine miscommunication. Blasted English language...
Most interesting.

I will edit this post to replace "you" with "one". This is a genuine miscommunication. Blasted English language…]]> By: Funky Dung http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243/comment-page-1#comment-9096 Funky Dung Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:08:43 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/2243#comment-9096 Pardon my lack of spell-check. I've been meaning to get a WP plugin for that. Anyhow.. I guess there's more than a little irony here. I am very much aware that you took no side on the abortion issue. I am also quite aware of the complete lack of human bias involved in the offending "glitch". My point, which was either poorly communicated by me or poorly understood by you, was that this was not a matter of miscommunication. You'd have to be be paranoid delusional, a moron, and/or totally blinded by your agenda(s) to be offended by that automated prompt. Also, you missed the deeper implications of the supposed miscommunication. That is, people were offended at the mere mention of the word "adoption". Adoption is only a threat to abortion if one is pro-abortion rather than pro-choice. I was, in my sloppy little way, trying to point out the hypocrisy of calling oneself pro-choice and then proceeding to be offended by one of the choices.
I guess there's more than a little irony here. I am very much aware that you took no side on the abortion issue. I am also quite aware of the complete lack of human bias involved in the offending "glitch". My point, which was either poorly communicated by me or poorly understood by you, was that this was not a matter of miscommunication. You'd have to be be paranoid delusional, a moron, and/or totally blinded by your agenda(s) to be offended by that automated prompt. Also, you missed the deeper implications of the supposed miscommunication. That is, people were offended at the mere mention of the word "adoption". Adoption is only a threat to abortion if one is pro-abortion rather than pro-choice. I was, in my sloppy little way, trying to point out the hypocrisy of calling oneself pro-choice and then proceeding to be offended by one of the choices.]]>