Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Slow-Schedule-7725 t1_jar21po wrote

i wonder how many people commenting actually read the entire article and didn’t just stop when they had the thought “this is stupid. this lady doesn’t know what she’s talking about.” because i would urge you to realize that this is exactly the same thing that ignorant, far-rights do and is what keeps them ignorant and safe in their bubble. if y’all are really so excited about progression; it starts with having an open mind, with being willing to consider ideas that differ from your own. dismissing ideas out of hand just undermines yourselves and reveals your own insecurities and doubts, especially when those ideas are coming from a literal doctor in the field of computational linguistics who is a highly regarded professor at UW and a Stanford PHD graduate.

0

alexiuss t1_jarbqpo wrote

While there are some interesting thoughts presented here, she has a very heavy bias skew towards memetically ideological insanity and total lack of knowledge how LLMs work, so no thanks. I stopped at the "intelligence is racist" self insert.

1

Surur t1_jarcau4 wrote

> it starts with having an open mind, with being willing to consider ideas that differ from your own.

Well, then you are knocking on the wrong door with this "literal doctor in the field of computational linguistics who is a highly regarded professor at UW and a Stanford PHD graduate."

> Bender has made a rule for herself: “I’m not going to converse with people who won’t posit my humanity as an axiom in the conversation.” No blurring the line.

Her mind is as open as a safe at Fort Knox lol.

1

Slow-Schedule-7725 t1_jarjzcd wrote

very confused as to how stating her credentials in the field contradicts having an open mind?? no one’s saying “you must listen to her because she’s an expert,” however it does and should give her thoughts more credibility than u/Surur also hiLARIOUS that you think demanding your literal humanity be considered in a conversation can be equated to having a closed mind.

0

Surur t1_jarkjtn wrote

You said it starts with having an open mind. If that is a prerequisite then she clearly lacks it, no matter what her credentials.

Am I meant to give her special status because she is human? Are her ideas more valuable because she is human? Is it the content or the source which matters?

Or is having an open mind no longer important, as long as she fits your biases?

1

Slow-Schedule-7725 t1_jarn4xr wrote

more valuable than whOSE?? there aren’t any ideas that areN’T human. we created the literal idea of ideas. ideas dont exist without us. and its the content aND the source that matters. if you saw a post saying there was a mole in the white house and you clicked and saw it was from a Chinese newspaper, you’d probably disregard it, but if it was from the head of the pentagon i bet you’d give it more credence. thats literally the entire reason you have to cite your sources in academic work, because the source matters just as much as the content does

1

Surur t1_jarnvyy wrote

Maybe judge an idea on its merit rather than appeal to authority, which is literally a logical fallacy.

But again, do you care about your expert having an open mind or not? Because hers is completely shut.

1

Slow-Schedule-7725 t1_jarpbkv wrote

well id rather an expert with a closed mind than a random reddit user with a closed mind🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️ also i literally said “its the content aND the source that matters” and “the source matters just as much as the content does.” not “more,” not “only the source matters.” its a combination of the two, you can’t look at one without looking at the other, thATS the “logical fallacy.”

1

Surur t1_jarsjkq wrote

Well, given that she is pushing unsubstantiated content, and you are appealing to her authority to try and pass it off, I would say this is exactly what the fallacy is referring to.

1