I'm excited to share this preprint by my wonderful MSc student Yihsin who's thought deeply about how psychological & neurocognitive theories relate to different types of evidence.
Beyond Empirical Success: Evaluating Theoretical Virtue Across the Computational Modeling Chain
doi.org/10.5281/zeno...
In 1992 Olympics Zhang Shan entered an open skeet event and beat all the men, winning gold.
The following year women were not allowed to enter. When women's events were brought back the events were segregated and the targets placed at a different distance so that the results could not be compared.
My own experience as a lower tier roller derby athlete has been seeing my team mates get kicked out of spaces in public parks by groups of men who wanted to play football. It happens at all levels from the ground up and then women's performance differences are held up as justification for inequality
Nowadays, the internet sometimes feels like a once well-to-do neighbourhood that became a slum after an industrial park & motorway were built through it. And I'm the lifelong resident who refuses to leave, unable to accept that the decaying, now unsafe area will never regain its former grandeur.
The real unfair competition women are being forced into with men is having women's sports constantly separated off as a distinct event which is made to compete commercially with much better funded and socially and institutionally enfranchised men's sporting events & found inadequate by that standard
So nice to see this out!
> The five core principles – honesty, Scrupulousness, transparency, independence and responsibility – remain unchanged.
www.nwo.nl/en/news/revi...
Image from: doi.org/10.5281/zeno...
"The five core principles – honesty, Scrupulousness, transparency, independence and responsibility – remain unchanged. The new code emphasises shared responsibility for integrity and extends the duties of care for institutions."
www.nwo.nl/en/news/revi...
"Governing bodies and senior management should actively promote the standards and principles set out in the code, and scientific integrity must be a recurring topic of discussion in the workplace and at other levels of the organisation."
www.nwo.nl/en/news/revi...
"The code states that institutions are responsible for providing a working environment that promotes and safeguards ethical research practices. They therefore have a duty of care to embed scientific integrity within the organisation and its policies."
www.nwo.nl/en/news/revi...
"[The code] covers all phases of research: from design to implementation, reporting, peer review and communication. Researchers should also follow the principles and standards set out in the code when using technologies such as AI."
www.nwo.nl/en/news/revi...
"Scientific integrity ensures that researchers can trust and build upon each other’s results, and forms the basis for public trust in research and for societal impact."
www.nwo.nl/en/news/revi...
"The five core principles – honesty, Scrupulousness, transparency, independence and responsibility – remain unchanged. The new code emphasises shared responsibility for integrity and extends the duties of care for institutions."
www.nwo.nl/en/news/revi...
Bolsonaro is not inevitable.
AI is not inevitable.
Now, people from the US, what do you need form us to help you win the midterms?
A tip: interview André Janones. All left wing YouTube channels should interview him.
We end on asking you to use our lens where useful to note Pygmalion displacements as a first step towards escaping the cycle of sexist AI-based harm. When a parallel between women and AI is drawn, ask whom does that bait-and-switch serve?
We also make the case that the Turing test, the imitation game (see "Interlude: Can women think?" in doi.org/10.31235/osf...) rhetorically helps to form the founding historical example of Pygmalion displacement: when women computers were replaced by digital computers.
To help us do this, we develop a lens to help us trace the harm towards women within/by AI by examining literature, film, and other media (see the figure above), and then apply the lens (also above) to current types of technologies like voice assistants to demonstrate its use.
I see this does not have ALT text. Not sure why/how I forgot, but I do have the reminder enabled nowadays (and have done for years; thread is from 2023) for it so I do not forget. I will redo it below...
I've a preprint with Annelies K. and Lelia E. that is relevant to feminised people and our relationship to AI; dehumanisation here follows previously underdiscussed patterns from AI's inception:
Pygmalion Displacement: When Humanising AI Dehumanises Women. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/jqxb6
I guess my point here is, that's on them, not on me. When I coined this phrase, I could see that I was dealing with hype (even in late 2020) and general lack of understanding of how language works & how we work with language. I didn't know I'd be dealing with a cult.
/fin
“If AI continues to improve at present rate, then in a few years, there’ll be nothing human mathematicians can do that AI can’t do better”
can professors please stop spreading doom. It affects undergrads & isn’t the whole point to keep future generations inspired & enthusiastic so fields dont die??
This guy is a terrible teacher, even if AI can solve problems, people still have to learn and strive for a better world, not just leave it up to the paperclip optimizers.
Today is Intersex Awareness Day. I am intersex – and did not find out until I was 26!
Intersex people are also impacted by the decision in FWS, but this is much less talked about. Intersex people continue to be subjected to non-consensual medical interventions.
Intersex rights are human rights.
Many workplaces have adopted a discourse of empowerment met by just increasing productivity pressures, and what you get is people being told their skills are still valued while practically being shown they aren’t.
Asking engineers to reimagine their work isn’t something they can do in isolation.
This is directly parallel to how UX design thoughtthinkers are on LinkedIn crowing how Claude Design lets us "do strategy—not pixel pushing", meanwhile design's access to the rooms where strategy is being done has NEVER been more constrained.
GenAI concentrates power in the manager class only!
I keep seeing people mentioning how ai-generated code lets you spend more time thinking about what the app should do, but I think there’s a need to remember that there are large groups of engineers whose role hasn’t been redefined to include that level of control and trust.
Maybe - the choice of NYU was not random (though that of course doesn't mean it wasn't bullshit)
"The report states that Trump’s promise of NYU admission is part of a pattern of Epstein promising an NYU education to “lure in and then control his victims,” "
newrepublic.com/post/217159/...