I simply cannot get myself to a point where they sincerely believe that but they keep saying the same nonsense again and again.
If someone were looking for rational, robust debate on the most pressing and critical topics, this (and most online forums) historically haven't been the venue for that.
Call in to C-SPAN or Thom Hartmann Monday to Friday for that. ;@)
Just how intertwined those corporations are with the government? Between this and the sudden shift against DEI policies even in companies who are staunch supporters of diversity I wonder what kinda pressure the gov is applying
[1]: https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/meta-robby-starbuck-ai-lawsuit-s...
You mean except their boss which has a long history with having problematic idea and just learned to not say it publicly?
I have been staying away from Meta because I think of Zuck as a dangerous ideologist with money since ~10+ years (through not anit-LBTGQ specific). I'm not surprised at all.
Likely because of the polemics of the article and its headline, many people in this thread are misinformed as to what Starbuck's role will be and that this came about as the result of a settlement.
There is also the joint statement posted by Joel Kaplan on X (likely the source for many articles): https://x.com/joel_kaplan/status/1953778908915982793 "Building on that work, Meta and Robby Starbuck will work collaboratively in the coming months to continue to find ways to address issues of ideological and political bias and minimize the risk that the model returns hallucinations in response to user queries."
The headline focusses on polemics and omits a detail many people would find quite important: that this was part of a lawsuit settlement. It also decides to use the word "appoint", which has a stronger underlying implication that Starbuck will have a job at / take a significant role in doing this at Meta.
It is important that this information is shared, but it is better if it's done accurately. I don't see why the source that Pinknews used itself, https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/meta-robby-starbuck-ai-lawsuit-s..., wasn't used instead.
> He and his wife, Landon, produced a documentary together perpetuating the same conspiracy theory spouted by disgraced commentator Alex Jones — that toxic chemicals are causing children to identify as LGBTQ+. Starbuck falsely asserted that exposure to the pesticide atrazine turned amphibians "gay,” prompting male frogs to mate — a claim that has been repeatedly debunked.
> Starbuck has also claimed that displaying pride flags is “grooming and indoctrination," and supported the unsubstantiated notion that transgender people transition to assault women in public bathrooms (transgender people are far more likely to be the victims of violent assaults.)
Trillion to one odds that "bias advisor" will be his third career failure. What's he going to do, look at every token? Rubber stamp the RL-HF?