Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
For example, if you publish a trans-phobic paper (e.g., detecting binary sex based on computer vision), that sends a message to the trans community that they are not welcome in ML. That’s a big harm to the scientific community.
Nonsense. A paper detecting sex is not transphobic, and that's not a reason to not publish it. Thanks for the example - that is exactly the kind of decision that I don't want others making for me.
If only UW had some resident experts on why this is harmful…https://www.hcde.washington.edu/news/os-keyes-to-give-talk-on-trans-erasure-and-algorithmic-bias …
Getting rejected by neurips is not the same as being censored. Being a leading forum on ML research; it is expected to have a high bar on quality for both ethics and scientific research. Otherwise, Neurips would be no different than Twitter or Reddit.
And in one reply tweet you ruined any credibility your entire argument had. Nicely done
Then, wouldn't it be logical for the trans people to not want you to make a decision whether such papers are transphobic?
Didn't you recently make the point that an ethics expert who doesn't understand computer science shouldn't be allowed determine whether a paper's published? Are you trans? Are you an expert on transgendered humans? Who put you in charge of what is and isn't transphobia?
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
