Project Veritas releases Google email, Shapiro, Prager, Peterson referenced

[WherevertheWindblows]

I set mine so that it does not autoplay. That way I am always choosing the next content rather than accepting what it does next.

Oh yeah, I never chose autoplay. I thought autoplay was different from what are considered the suggested vids (the ones down along the right side).

 

[LoAmmi]

Now does someone want to explain how Jordan Peterson is a Nazi dog whistler? I don't get that one.

It is the AI that is making the decisions. I don't see what about Peterson is racist.

Depends on if you think "cultural marxism" is a reference to Jews, to be honest. What I mean is that it means different things to different people. To the Neo-Nazis it is about Jews and that would be the context similar phrases and ideas were used in Nazi Germany. (Globalism too, BTW) I don't think your average guy who says it (or even Peterson) means it in that way. But it's like the problem. The language and signs get muddy. When all the people were giving the OK sign to show that they were white supremacists, it was muddy because if it was called out, well geeze, now the left even thinks the OK sign is RACIST! Some people used it ironically... others didn't. So it's difficult to pick out the people who use phrases and are trying to signal they mean something more, people who use it because they're in on the joke and want to be an edgelord, and others using it to mean something else.

 

[variant]

Now does someone want to explain how Jordan Peterson is a Nazi dog whistler? I don't get that one.

It is the AI that is making the decisions. I don't see what about Peterson is racist.

Being a racist and appealing to racists would be two different things. You could do the second without being the first, or even trying.

 

[tall73]

Depends on if you think "cultural marxism" is a reference to Jews, to be honest. What I mean is that it means different things to different people. To the Neo-Nazis it is about Jews and that would be the context similar phrases and ideas were used in Nazi Germany. (Globalism too, BTW) I don't think your average guy who says it (or even Peterson) means it in that way. But it's like the problem. The language and signs get muddy. When all the people were giving the OK sign to show that they were white supremacists, it was muddy because if it was called out, well geeze, now the left even thinks the OK sign is RACIST! Some people used it ironically... others didn't. So it's difficult to pick out the people who use phrases and are trying to signal they mean something more, people who use it because they're in on the joke and want to be an edgelord, and others using it to mean something else.

Peterson is not responsible for how people take that phrase. He spells out what he means, talks against historic communists and collectivism, etc. I have never heard him frame it in regards to anti-semitic rhetoric.

 

[tall73]

Being a racist and appealing to racists would be two different things. You could do the second without being the first, or even trying.

So if racists hear racism in anything--how is that his fault? And let's face it, the issue is the AI thinks everything is a dog whistle to feed Nazi content. That cannot possibly be Peterson's problem.

 

[tall73]

Oh yeah, I never chose autoplay. I thought autoplay was different from what are considered the suggested vids (the ones down along the right side).

Yes it is different. Autoplay literally pops another video up if you don't stop it, and it will play.

 

[Tanj]

I think discussions of limiting recommendations and saying that three conservative commentators are nazi dog whistlers is a bit of a revelation.

Ahh, that does explain it thanks.

I think discussion of limiting an AI because they don't know what else to do about it and saying that it's possible nazi-associated references with some vids were responsible for the follow on suggestions is a boring bit of technical exchange between two employees.

But, yes, if you feel the need to shoehorn anything at all into your preconceived persecution complex, I can see how you would read it they way you did, regardless of the well documented bottom dwelling, immoral and duplicitous actions of the people that produced the piece.

 

[tall73]

Ahh, that does explain it thanks.

I think discussion of limiting an AI because they don't know what else to do about it and saying that it's possible nazi-associated references with some vids were responsible for the follow on suggestions is a boring bit of technical exchange between two employees.

But, yes, if you feel the need to shoehorn anything at all into your preconceived persecution complex, I can see how you would read it they way you did, regardless of the well documented bottom dwelling, immoral and duplicitous actions of the people that produced the piece.

Did you miss the public conversation on the same issue that I also referenced? This issue is one that has been discussed by Google's CEO in public, not just by people you want to insult. It is essentially more data on the conversation.

Now if their AI is causing them to change how they relate to some content providers who are not in fact white supremacists, yes that is of interest to me.

 

[Kentonio]

Peterson is not responsible for how people take that phrase. He spells out what he means, talks against historic communists and collectivism, etc. I have never heard him frame it in regards to anti-semitic rhetoric.

So if racists hear racism in anything--how is that his fault? And let's face it, the issue is the AI thinks everything is a dog whistle to feed Nazi content. That cannot possibly be Peterson's problem.

Are the company holding him personally responsible or threatening to limit his use of their service in any way?

They're discussing how their software works, and in the process pointing out that the rhetoric these people use bears similarities to the language used by the white nationalists, which causes the AI to create these links. Why would it be a problem if they put in place custom measures to prevent this happening?

 

[variant]

So if racists hear racism in anything--how is that his fault? And let's face it, the issue is the AI thinks everything is a dog whistle to feed Nazi content. That cannot possibly be Peterson's problem.

It's an AI. It makes connections, it can't make moral decisions.

Not yet anyway I hope.

 

[LoAmmi]

Peterson is not responsible for how people take that phrase. He spells out what he means, talks against historic communists and collectivism, etc. I have never heard him frame it in regards to anti-semitic rhetoric.

The phrase pre-dates him. He's using it a different way than historical use, and I've never heard him say anything to make me think he means it in a racist way. On the other hand...

If a guy started saying that he had a "final solution" for, say, immigration, even if the plan had nothing to do with killing people and he was adamant about what it was, wouldn't that raise some eyebrows? Wouldn't that make you wonder if the person was, perhaps, attempting to court a group of people who might like the use of "final solution" when discussing immigration?

 

[KCfromNC]

Because the other thread revolved around the editing of videos. This one does not because it is a separate revelation to the others, and does not involve video.

It involves a possibly edited e-mail taken totally out of context, unlike the previous thread which revolved around edited videos taken totally out of context.

 

[KCfromNC]

I think discussions of limiting recommendations and saying that three conservative commentators are nazi dog whistlers is a bit of a revelation.

Too bad Vertias didn't release enough context to know what data led to this conclusion. At this point, we'll just have to guess.

 

[KCfromNC]

It's an AI. It makes connections, it can't make moral decisions.

Depends on whether you think that people making various judgements using processes we can't explain is fundamentally different from machines making various judgements using processes we can't explain.

At least the machine software has version control so we can roll back changes that lead to errors.

 

[KCfromNC]

The phrase pre-dates him. He's using it a different way than historical use, and I've never heard him say anything to make me think he means it in a racist way. On the other hand...

If a guy started saying that he had a "final solution" for, say, immigration, even if the plan had nothing to do with killing people and he was adamant about what it was, wouldn't that raise some eyebrows? Wouldn't that make you wonder if the person was, perhaps, attempting to court a group of people who might like the use of "final solution" when discussing immigration?

Or in this context, wouldn't he appreciate it if a company improved their product such that it didn't automatically link him with people who have views he would find rather offensive? Seems that's what the out of context quotes from the e-mails are about.

What's the problem, again?

 

[PeachyKeane]

Deleted.

 

[Pommer]

It's an AI. It makes connections, it can't make moral decisions.

Not yet anyway I hope.

I look forward to the day when I can die at the whim of an AI, then we’ll know they have arrived!

 

[tall73]

Are the company holding him personally responsible or threatening to limit his use of their service in any way?

They have been demonetizing videos on his channel based on AI etc. for some time. And they have with many channels. This includes progressive channels that are anti-war.

For a time in August of 2017 they locked him out of his channel, citing terms of service violations they did not specify, and indicated the channel would not be reinstated. But then later they did reinstate it. There are a variety of issues for many creators regarding Youtube taking actions against them for vague reasons that often come down to viewpoints expressed.

They have recently started demonetizing more in the wake of the Crowder issue.

He posted about their use of the term Nazi for him on Twitter, and we will have to wait to see what, if anything, he says about recommendation trend data.

They're discussing how their software works, and in the process pointing out that the rhetoric these people use bears similarities to the language used by the white nationalists, which causes the AI to create these links. Why would it be a problem if they put in place custom measures to prevent this happening?

A. It would not be a problem if they prevent it from happening.

B. They called the three Nazis and said they are using dog whistles. Now dog whistles are supposed to be intentional but less overt signals to their audience. But the AI even impacted history channels that just talked about Nazis, and anti-Nazi groups. Yes, it would be good to fix it. BUt to use such terms to describe posters who are not Nazis is not objective.

And if the solution is to not promote certain content creators because of ideology, then they may run afoul of section 230 of the Communications Decency Act under which they receive liability protections as a platform, rather than an editorial publisher.

There is a current bill proposed in the senate to establish an enforcement mechanism to make sure that large tech companies are complying with this.

 

[tall73]

It's an AI. It makes connections, it can't make moral decisions.

Not yet anyway I hope.

Agreed, but the AI is programed by people who do. And if they are editing content in regards to ideology thy may forfeit protections as a platform.

 

[tall73]

The phrase pre-dates him. He's using it a different way than historical use, and I've never heard him say anything to make me think he means it in a racist way. On the other hand...

If a guy started saying that he had a "final solution" for, say, immigration, even if the plan had nothing to do with killing people and he was adamant about what it was, wouldn't that raise some eyebrows? Wouldn't that make you wonder if the person was, perhaps, attempting to court a group of people who might like the use of "final solution" when discussing immigration?

Final Solution, yes.

However, the phrase final solution doesn't have much meaning apart from its historic connotations.

Cultural Bolshevikism was used by Nazis, but the related phrase cultural marxism still has actual meaning apart from that usage. It is those with marxist leanings trying to shape society.

However, the larger issue is that a Google employee stated today in the senate hearings that they don't discriminate against political views. So on what basis can they remove Nazi, Marxist, Libertarian, or any other viewpoint? They are a platform.