human-driven technology goes brrrrr
You must log in or register to comment.
And people still whinge about mansplaining not being a thing
What’s that?
It’s a phenomenon where men assume they have superior knowledge to women, even if the woman their talking to is literally an expert in her field.
People will associate what you’re saying with pretty much everything even if it doesn’t make sense
Like how can one say that’s mansplaining and not just a baseless thought? What guarantees that they only do this with women?
Why split hairs about what’s going on rather than focusing on the fact that he talked down to a subject matter expert?
True. I’m sure plenty of mansplaining comes from blistful ignorance and unawareness, rather than outright misogynisticly driven malice, which is not a valid excuse to be an asshole.
This is almost as good as the jackass who tried to tell Margaret Atwood that “the woman who wrote that book was talking about Muslims, not Christians”
That sounds good. Got a link?
i remember them saying the app wont get certain featues, cause it just makes the whole thing less secure. even tho the dude only has the pattern recognition of a dead crow, i do have to add that no company should be trusted, BUT having an open source client is a good way to win me over. and as far as i can tell, the molly devs would purge the ai implementation crazy fuckin fast anyway.
To be fair, as soon as Signal chooses do to so, they can walk back any statement. Her words don’t hold much value either…
I guess people forgot how Mozilla not that long ago simply went ahead and deleted mentions of ‘never selling your data’
That’s why I embraced xmpp. I liked what Signal is doing, but I don’t believe any company, or anyone that owns one.
It’s why a lot of you are here lol
Lemmy users will really do anything before they believe a woman, won’t they?
"The man is still correct because the Signal CEO may claim that TODAY that engineers are not currently working on adding AI, but that doesn’t mean in the future she won’t say it was worked on in the past!"
Lemmy users will really do anything before they believe a woman, won’t they?
What a weird take on this.
💅
Are you a feminist by chance? Just asking cuz I know a feminist who uses this particular emoji a lot haha.
I’ll do anything before I believe a CEO. Gender is a social construct.
She’s also the founder of AI Now, which produces reports on the social impact of AI.
Its 2023 Report argued that meaningful reform of the tech sector must focus on addressing concentrated power in the tech industry.
The company behind Signal, Signal Messenger LLC, is not publicly traded. That and VC money tends to be where the problems begin. When it comes down to it, companies are just collections of people who band together to accomplish something that they couldn’t on their own. We’re so used to companies being soul sucking parasites of capitalism that we’ve lost track of what they’re for.
While its non-profit nature may prevent this kind of corruption because it isn’t publicly traded, there’s still the matter of influence from funding.
That being said it’s less likely to happen without being caught, what with the annual audit requirements of non-profits and auditors being required to report funders with significant influence.
Though crooked auditors do exist, sadly.
I help run a non-profit makerspace, and believe me, I know how non-profits in this country are bullshit. Not that my makerspace has done so, but when you go over the laws involved, it’s quite obvious how many loopholes there are. Just for starters, the board can pay itself whatever salary they like. As long as you do all the paperwork, tons of stuff is legal.
(I was President for a year. I got a salary of $0 like everyone else on the board.)
That said, the reports coming out of AI Now are not what AI advocates in venture capital want to hear. Not at all.
Fair enough! I appreciate that you’ve considered the possible bias
She’s the president of the foundation, the CEO of Signal is Brian Acton.
Correction:
I’ll do anything before I believe the president of a foundation built by a company.
In all fairness, if a CEO doesn’t introduce themself as a CEO, there’s really no reasonable expectation for random internet strangers to know that.
I would have had no idea who that was.
I think key context is that the guy is representing himself as having special knowledge about what Signal is doing internally and what they’ll do next.
It’s not “you bump into some rando on the street. Don’t you know she’s CEO of Signal??”
It’s “you’re giving a Ted Talk about Signal. The woman in the front row offers a correction and you’re like, ‘shut up, dummy.’”
the guy is representing himself as having special knowledge about what Signal is doing internally and what they’ll do next.
I didn’t get that impression- to me it just came off as him being cynical about platform enshittification.
Like, with recent news of Nexus being sold, my reaction was to join a chorus of others excplaiming that Nexus is about to be shit. We don’t know that - we just know it’s being sold. But we’ve all seen a ton of services follow a similar path, so the assumption feels justified. If a Nexus employee came out and said “Don’t panic, literally nothing is going to change!” Whether that came from the janitor or CEO, I’d have a similar knee-jerk as the dude in the OP.
I also have no idea who the old or new CEO of Nexis is. If it happens to be a woman, me arguing with her wouldn’t be from sexism, it’d be because Nexus is setting the stage to go down the toilet.
Dude in OP absolutely could just be a misogynistic prick, but there’s certainly not enough info in the screencap to say so with any certainty.
In general perhaps, but he literally said
The engineers have already began laying out the ground work for such support.
This really makes it sound like he’s pretending to know what he’s talking about when he doesn’t.
funny story, I insulted a Microsoft exec, to their face, because they introduced themselves as “working for Microsoft”.
I told them in response, " Don’t worry, I won’t hold that against you." To which they asked, “What’s that supposed to mean?” I said, “You work for them and don’t even know? you certainly drank all the koolaide.”
almost lost my job over that when my employer found out.
If I found out I was talking down to a Microsoft exec when I thought I was talking to a regular employee, I’d double down.
I would have told them to bring back Clippy 📎 as an AI companion, but inappropriately erotic. 👠
So…Cortana?
He replied to her post about how signal won’t use AI and she said “we”. He 100% assumed a woman was a nobody so he paid no attention. This is all on him.
https://bsky.app/profile/meredithmeredith.bsky.social/post/3lrqccvwnqs2z
Important context. Yeah that definitely reduces the benefit of the doubt, but I still wouldn’t jump to sexism. People refer to the organizations they’re employed by as ‘we’ all the time - that doesn’t imply any kind of authority. He definitely assumed she was a nobody, but 99.999% of us are just peasants milking a roof over our heads from a system we have absolutely no control over… so, assuming she’s a nobody is a pretty safe assumption. Were she a dude and all else the same, I don’t see the conversation going any differently.
There are tons, and tons, and tons, and tons of examples of demonstrable and absolutely clear misogyny in our dumb fucking society - it’s really not necessary to try to find it by attempting to read between the lines.
So… unless that dude has a history of misogynistic bs, imo the safer assumption is that he’s being cynical about platform enshittification (and reasonably so when you consider the patterns shown by every single other platform), vs an attack based on gender.
Sometimes it’s obvious misogyny and sometimes it isn’t but this has the hallmarks.
It definitely does; my take is only that is has the hallmarks of more benign activity too. I can’t say with any certainty that it IS one or the other. Suspicion is justified; torches and pitchforks, not quite yet.
Because nobody on the internet ever talks down to a man.
If the owner of signal commented in this thread I would have no idea lol
There is no owner, it’s a 501c3. Meredith is the CEO.
Double-secret
Same difference
A section 501©(3) organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, such as the creator or the creator’s family, shareholders of the organization, other designated individuals, or persons controlled directly or indirectly by such private interests. No part of the net earnings of a section 501©(3) organization may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. A private shareholder or individual is a person having a personal and private interest in the activities of the organization.
From IRS.gov.
It really isn’t. The designation should be meaningful because it is. So what are you even talking about?!
I think my username applies to you, this distinction doesn’t really matter in the context of my original comment so everyone rushing to correct me is funny lnao
This happens to me a lot. I would be using some terms loosely and people would only jump to them, getting the wrong idea. People really need to chill out, let us have a causal conversation.
It’s really not. It’s an important distinction.
For this discussion it isn’t really relevant which title they hold in the organization, I still wouldn’t recognize them lol.
She posted with a “we” statement about her own company. If someone did that, you might think about who they are but this guy completely assumed she was a know nothing nobody.
https://bsky.app/profile/meredithmeredith.bsky.social/post/3lrqccvwnqs2z
Well now you would ;)
No lol
Thank you for that!
I have been laughing for the past hour.
I wonder if he would have done the same thing talking to a man…
People are putting this on sexism or whatever, but I feel like this dude is just one of those confidently wrong people and would have said this to literally anyone disagreeing with him.
I am a man, and an expert in my field, and I get people trying to condescend semi-regularly because they think they can handwave the problems I get paid to solve. Just completely unfounded confidence.
I wonder [whether] he would have done the same thing talking to a man…
I was entertained to see someone get their comeuppance.
I was disappointed to see someone else immediately go sexist on the post.
I am now doubly disappointed that we’re not better than that person, here.
Sometimes an idiot is just an idiot. Leave room for people to grow into, okay?
And sometimes idiots are sexist.
Why are you dismissing this as a possibility?
Why are you dismissing this as a possibility?
They’re not. The burden of proof works in a way that the person making a claim (“they’re sexist”) needs to back it up with evidence. They’re not saying he’s definitively not sexist; they’re saying there’s insufficient evidence.
But it’s not unreasonable to suspect sexism, even if we don’t know for sure one way or the other. Suspicious behavior isn’t proof of guilt, but it’s still pretty sus 😒
Okay, but she just responds with the misandrist “why are men”, obviously directly accusing him of being sexist on inconclusive circumstantial evidence. That’s going well beyond “suspecting” him of anything.
They’re making accusations based on reasonable suspicion. That’s still not going beyond suspicion - it’s not like anyone is calling for any action to be taken against him. He’s not losing his job, or being doxxed, or has protesters outside his house.
It’s just an accusation in the extremely low stakes Court of public opinion.
ROFL Reply guys, they are a special kind of dumb sometimes.
What she doesn’t realize is that he’s secretly leading a coup from inside the company.
/joke
Didn’t realize I clicked a link and wondered when the screenshot was going to end…
Also, even this suggestion betrays a lack of understanding about how signal works. A big part of the long term security signal offers is that they don’t store data, so LLM integration would be on-device.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I’m downvoting because of your edit complaining about down-votes.
And “I’m downvoting your downvoting because of the complaint on complaining about downvotes.”
Can we go full recursion on this bullshit?
I wish my instance allowed down votes for this very reason.
we downvoted because we didnt like your comment
hope that helps
Are you editing in all the people who is downvoting you?
You can see who downvotes you on lemmy?
Not through Lemmy, but there are tools.
That’s wild, thanks!
deleted by creator
He is lmfao, what a dork.
