SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Journal by kolie
whats up soylentils. any good meta discussion of soylent we care to have?
-- other than actual doxxing or CSAM etc don't flag posts here thx --
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
It was all so different before everything changed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 18, @03:04AM (8 children)
I'd like to say these are very childish comments, but they are also quite heavy satire. Burning witches? Pretty old school. Totally agreed those are worth flagging as disruptive. One problem is enforcing rules upon subjective content and context, while allowing other situations which are functionally identical.
When do false positives, discrimination, become worth it? What sigma delta might ruin your life when "the computer said no."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by kolie on Saturday October 18, @04:42AM (7 children)
Its not necessarily the content and subjectivenesss of it - its the attribution to a known banned user, content aside.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 18, @10:01AM (1 child)
I see that janrinok the censor is censoring very pertinent information. Someone has reported that aristarchus is dead. We await independent confirmation of course, but why would janrinok seek to suppress this news? Have to say, not unexpected. Always thought that he and Runaway would kick the bucket at about the same time.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 25, @10:48AM
Just the other day, I heard that aristarchus was dead, and I thought, janrinok will be most pleased, his nemesis is no more! Wonder what the cause of death was, spam moderation, IP blockage, or ass-fixiation? Hard to guess with someone of such an age. But things should be more peaceful around here, without all janrinok's running about trying to squelch the old buzzard! Where should we send flowers? (Dias de Muertos is close, right?)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 18, @01:48PM (4 children)
Sure, but there have been mistakes and I was specifically bringing up automated methods. The world is increasingly handing responsibility to AI systems and at some point something bad will happen and people will shrug and blame the computer. It will be 10x worse than corporate BS.
As for your exact point there have been users that were falsely accused and the defense was it sounded like a banned user. That is subjective content discrimination and referring to a banned user shows how easily bias can enter the equation.
My point was more about society and how allowing AI to make these subjective decisions makes a black box method of discrimination that allows malicious abuse to be blamed on software "bugs." The banned user situation here is just an example of how subjective decisions will have errors even with a human making the calls, and I wanted to tie that into a larger point about the perils of automated moderation of humans.
(Score: 2) by kolie on Saturday October 18, @05:12PM (3 children)
Good thing there is a human in the loop here. Use of automation in this system is only in alerting and correlating data.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 18, @07:29PM
I see the politically and racially biased spam modding continues apace. Nice job, SN!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 19, @02:36AM (1 child)
Sure, but the same point applies. False positives happen. At least with a human there is someone to reason with if they are capable. The record so far is not great.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 20, @08:29PM
Just raising the possibility, if the dread aristarchus is actually dead, ALL the flaggings are cases of false positives? Do we have any proof the null hypothesis is to be rejected?