Gregory's Server@dave_cochran Alright. Train better the SoMe worker after a solid warning. Fire their Manager.
To be clearer: reputation and legal risk are way underestimated in this industry. It has to change. Yes, that means people at responsibility and strategy level thinking AI is harmless and allowing or promoting its unsupervised use, mostly for cost reasons (and ignoring externalities), losing their jobs.
|
Top-level
5 comments
@dave_cochran “Absolutely no reason to think would cause harm”, in 2024, in a design-oriented communications and events community and business. Alright. Let me elaborate: it was the Manager’s job to a. have heard and learned from Monteiro e.g. 11y ago (see Webstock 2013 iirc), b. have heard and learned about e.g. Gebru et al. stories and work. Defending workers is right, hence my leaning towards your point. Managers are paid to know better. About time for some accountability in those fields. @dave_cochran To be honest and fair, let in charge, I would fire producers of indoors conferences without neither masks mandates nor best-in-line air renewing and filtering infrastructures and practices too for being stupid and having learned nothing, to explain how I approach taking care of people attending events, or producing/volunteering/speaking there. YMMV.  @dave_cochran Then you cannot not see the issue with a woman speaker being sexualized through automation and edition of a picture she provided but never consented to be edited, never being shown the edited version, and nothing internally preventing that to a. happen, b. not be thrown away in due time, c. ever be published. How is it taking good care of your speaker community? How can it not show failure at a high level of core biz competencies? How can someone in charge not be fired? |
@shalf have you seen this report? https://www.nngroup.com/articles/computer-skill-levels/
admittedly, it's a few years old now but I'd bet all the money in all of my pockets against all the money in all of yours that the data would be essentially the same if it was done again today.
The short version is that people, as a group, are WAY worse at using computers than people, as a group, think. Like, by virtue of having and using a Mastodon account at all, you are probably in the top 20% or so of computer users worldwide.
The point being, punishing people for things they cannot reasonably be expected to know about or even to know that there's ANYTHING TO LEARN about them, is counterproductive at best, and actively harmful at worst.
It's probably worth keeping in mind that we're talking about the folks running a conference here, and not, like, Facebook. If anything, this could become a phenomenal talk at the very conference it happened at since they're talking about UI/UX stuff (if I'm remembering the OP correctly)!
I just don't think that people acting in good faith should be penalized for things that they had absolutely no reason to think would cause harm, y'know?
@shalf have you seen this report? https://www.nngroup.com/articles/computer-skill-levels/
admittedly, it's a few years old now but I'd bet all the money in all of my pockets against all the money in all of yours that the data would be essentially the same if it was done again today.
The short version is that people, as a group, are WAY worse at using computers than people, as a group, think. Like, by virtue of having and using a Mastodon account at all, you are probably in the top 20% or so of computer...