I generally assume that policing other people’s language is a form of wokism
an ironic twist on calling it “wokism” is that “tone policing” originated as a term from social justice thinking as a critique against attempts to silence or trivialize marginalized voices based on the way they express their concerns. far be it from me to say you can’t, but it’s certainly an interesting choice of words.
Engaging with these arguments is pointless. Instead, the correct response is to define how you are using a word and move on.
if you aren’t interested in attempting to use words in a way that makes their meanings accurate from ambient context, then yes, sometimes definitions work, but if you won’t agree with the meaning of a word that is typically used to hype something as progress on a technical topic because you want to use it for less impactful things, the typical word for that is “clickbait”.
the things you list are interesting, and I do not intend to diss them at all. my critique being only about your word choice is because that’s all I want to critique. proceed according to taste.
an ironic twist on calling it “wokism” is that “tone policing” originated as a term from social justice thinking as a critique against attempts to silence or trivialize marginalized voices based on the way they express their concerns.
Yes. I am 100% attempting to do tone policing. The tone-policing I am hoping to enforce is “stop arguing about definitions and please talk about technical aspects of AI alignment”. Given the comments on this post (currently 4 about hating the name and 0 about technical alignment issues) I have utterly failed. 🤷♂️
an ironic twist on calling it “wokism” is that “tone policing” originated as a term from social justice thinking as a critique against attempts to silence or trivialize marginalized voices based on the way they express their concerns. far be it from me to say you can’t, but it’s certainly an interesting choice of words.
if you aren’t interested in attempting to use words in a way that makes their meanings accurate from ambient context, then yes, sometimes definitions work, but if you won’t agree with the meaning of a word that is typically used to hype something as progress on a technical topic because you want to use it for less impactful things, the typical word for that is “clickbait”.
the things you list are interesting, and I do not intend to diss them at all. my critique being only about your word choice is because that’s all I want to critique. proceed according to taste.
Yes. I am 100% attempting to do tone policing. The tone-policing I am hoping to enforce is “stop arguing about definitions and please talk about technical aspects of AI alignment”. Given the comments on this post (currently 4 about hating the name and 0 about technical alignment issues) I have utterly failed. 🤷♂️