tree_of_item

The text of the tweet:

Today @heritage will critique gender identity @UN_CSW because powerful nations are pressing for the radical redefining of sex. If they can change the definition of women to include men, they can erase efforts to empower women economically, socially, and politically. #CSW63

That tweet does not say anything like "trans people don't exist", or that they should be harmed in any way, or that they aren't human. That tweet expresses a perfectly reasonable sentiment that many others share: that human beings are sexually dimorphic and cannot change sex. This sort of hyperbole on the part of transactivists is very frustrating: anyone who doesn't agree with extremist gender ideology is painted as a "bigot".

This is more important than one AI ethics panel with questionable authority. Google is in a position to censor and influence a huge amount of speech on the internet, and the fact that they were targeted by and arguably caved to a small extremist group is very troubling.

Literally there are no such tweets.

This is not that nuanced argument. I can assure you no one that is trans "pretends" to be a woman for sports records. That comment (as well as the word choice of "disgusting") shows a severe lack of understanding of trans people.

They may not view their own activity as "pretending" to be women, but the position of people like Kay Cole James (and many others, on both the left and right) is that they are simply not women. Whether or not they believe it about themselves is irrelevant.

Sport is a huge issue that affects a large number of people. You cannot just brush it aside like that.

The same reasoning is going to apply to e.g. restroom usage as well.

What's wrong with this tweet? This is a common view. Gender identity is a very extreme concept that erases sex as a protected characteristic.

Today @heritage will critique gender identity @UN_CSW because powerful nations are pressing for the radical redefining of sex. If they can change the definition of women to include men, they can erase efforts to empower women economically, socially, and politically. #CSW63

There are many other people who are saying the same thing about gender identity. It's strange that Vox describes this as "a particular cause for concern". It's not about "dehumanizing" trans people, it's about self-identification not being a valid basis for a law. If the Equality Act passes as written then the addition of gender identity would effectively remove sex as a protected characteristic.

It doesn't look like this board was a very good idea if the members were not okay with the first sign of disagreement. Will Google's actual AI projects even listen to this group at this point? It reminds me of AMP claiming to have a community driving the specification when in reality Google is just going to do whatever they want.

Their model used 256 of Google's Cloud TPU v3, though I've not seen training durations. The TPU v3 is only available individually outside of @Google (though @OpenAI likely got special dispensation) which means you'd be paying $8 * 256 = $2048 per hour.

https://twitter.com/Smerity/status/1096189352743301120

Thanks. So then it was 32 TPUv3s, to be more precise, and sticker-price training costs would then be per Smerity 32 * 24 * 7 * 8 = $43k?

https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/aqlzde/r_o...

The framing here is really disingenuous. Being concerned about men who "identify" as women being allowed in women's sport is completely reasonable and not mere "resentment". There are real physical differences between men and women, such as bone density, muscle density, lung capacity, heart size, etc that are not undone by hormone therapy or reassignment surgery, and certainly not by self-identification. Navratilova is completely correct, and I'm really shocked that anyone could portray her comments as "transphobic".

Easy fix: ask for sex instead of gender. 3 options: male, female, won't state. Genuine intersex people are incredibly rare and have faced this choice many times before and will just choose the one they feel comfortable with; it won't actually affect your stats too much.

I don't have a clue about VR stuff, and this is the first time I'm hearing about "Firefox Reality". Why do you need a special browser? What's different about this one?

I'm really confused, IFTTT is free for individuals and the signup flow was very easy for me. What exactly did you do to go so off track?

They made Eliza in to an app?

Huh?

You don't redownload it every time. If your browser cache gets removed then so does the game. Is your browser cache getting removed every time? This just strikes me as a really strange thing to say.

Why doesn't it make sense? You don't redownload it every time.

Eh? I don't really understand; a progressive web app is standalone, but of course the browser has to be involved, it's a web app.

I'm not sure what your point is though. Yes, Google could take an internal project, turn it in to a product, and then "proceed to screw up said product"...over the course of, what, 5, 10 years? What is the point of speculating about something so far off with no data? They could also turn it in to a product and then not "screw it up".

What am I being naive about? Do all of the wildly successful Google products not count here?

I'm really baffled by this question. Screw what up? Fuchsia is not a product; some people at Google are working on a project and it's gotten a bit of attention. I'm just confused as to the level of entitlement that would presume there is something here to "screw up".

Why can't I just get a reasonable definition of what a Tsetlin machine is?

It's in the paper. You don't have to read the whole thing, it's pretty early on.

I just want to say I'm really shocked that you would continue to argue with this person, who obviously has dramatically more experience with this particular topic than you do. What exactly are you trying to do, prove them wrong?

You also put up a really simple strawman with "homeless person dying on the street". That's a really contrived scenario and not what actually happens, as the person you're replying to has already explained.

Actually it struck me as really tenacious of him and I'd be willing to believe he has some merit. I'd like to see the data.

I think one flaw in your analysis is that Flutter is not analogous to "Java in the enterprise": it's already very pleasant to use compared with modern web frameworks.

As I write this report some European editions of U.S. newspapers appear to still be impacted by the attack. The San Diego Union Tribune online edition is unavailable and the website instead displays a message that simply states: "Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market."

I'm pretty sure this is due to GPDR, not anything North Korea did. Really strange that the author didn't know this. I thought of the Gell-Mann amnesia effect right away: does this person even know what they're talking about?

(Your comment reads quite uncharitable/mean btw, hard to tell if it was intentional)

Really? I didn't get that at all. Was it edited?

I thought the same. I get the sense people gloss over this in their promotion of vegetarianism/veganism

Where are the JMAP servers? The protocol isn't finished yet.

Yeah, I actually agree with that. I wonder why you think our statements were incompatible, because that is the sort of thing I would have described as a "silly dismissal". The problem was clearly an AI problem right up until it's solved, and then suddenly it's "not real AI" and people talk about AI being overhyped or whatever.

Imagine if people treated programming languages like that. People would get excited about the idea of communicating with a computer, and then when you finally build Python and show it to them, they say "but that's just parsing, what about a real language?" The bar just keeps rising whenever you get close to it. That's the sort of thing I meant by "silly dismissal".

I don't think your reasoning here is sound. PoW is the elected federation of validators, it's just that they're elected in a very flexible way.

It looks like you took the exact opposite inference from the parent than I did: it's not about vaporware, it's about people's impossible standards for what's considered "artificial intelligence".

The neural network stuff is anything but vaporware, it's delivered incredible results, but people keep coming up with silly dismissals along the lines of it not being "real AI".

tl;dr PWAs are on the brink of being a "thing": technical abilities are accumulating, but it's not clear if the political will to "commit to the web" exists. If you have experience developing native apps, just do that. There's no reason to jump ship and make a PWA because it's not clear if they're going to take off or not.

Google has shown some investment in PWAs on Android with the development of "WebAPKs", a way to manage the installation of progressive web apps through the Play store.

However, this mechanism is not entirely public: Chrome for Android will create a WebAPK when asked to add a PWA to the home screen, but currently you cannot create a WebAPK yourself and list it in the Play Store.

The point I'm trying to make is that while PWAs are slowly gaining technical abilities, Google hasn't yet gone "all in" wrt PWAs being a true form of "app". It's not clear where exactly they're headed; there are some indications that there is a kind of "cold war" between the Chrome and Android teams.[0]

Microsoft has shown much more commitment to PWAs by making them available in the Windows app store. I believe Firefox has some support, and I'm only aware of Safari recently starting development of Service Workers, a necessary component for PWAs.

As far as adoption in the wild:

- Google has created a PWA version of Maps, Maps Go, available in the Play Store. This shows that PWAs are technically capable, but still not "blessed", in that you couldn't make a PWA and list it in the store like that.

- Twitter Lite in the Play Store is a WebView wrapper around a PWA, getting around the restriction I just mentioned.

[0] https://medium.com/@firt/is-there-a-cold-war-between-android...