ANPEQ-1

If the partnership between tech and the US government were as tight as you might think, we wouldn't be losing so badly on the information warfare front.

The fact is that the United States has such a massive bureaucracy between itself private innovation. If we had anyone dual-employed in both government and the private sector, they're in the latter because they can'd do anything useful for the former.

"Learning Experience" vs. "Permanent, intractable and public Scarlet Letter" :|

"Newspapers have always had an agenda"

I'm fine with this, so long as they don't insist on their objectivity. Otherwise everything they say must be filtered through an undefined lens that readers either a) don't have time for and are thus victimized by the 'untruth' or b) believe and desire the confirmation bias and are thus victimized by misinformation.

As a former NYTimes employee, I can assure you that 99% of the work is not done in good faith. It's all activism now, top to bottom. There's a few good eggs granted, but the newspaper has an agenda and uses their pseudo-objectivity/newspaper of record as cover and concealment.

It is always entertaining when the 'newspaper of record' shames other publications for their mistakes and failings.

Thank you. There is such thing as legitimate secrets. The threat of jail for wholesale and thoughtless release of top secret information... is a good threat. Professional journalists know this and shouldn't jump on the Assange bandwagon; they understand that their power comes a duty of care.

The CJR skirts this issue by simply ignoring it. Color me surprised...

God forbid we do our best to seek objectivity /s

I mean, I'd argue that journalism as it should be is focused on truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability - all standards one would assume are important given The Markup's stated mission - but your point about not all writing aspiring to be fact-based is well taken.

Ahhh okay, interesting. I guess that is interesting news for all the racist and sexist small business owners out there barf

I'm 100% positive that quality journalists can research quality stories irrespective of their background. It happens all the time.

Seems pretty clear cut that Sue Gardner was making hiring decisions based on practices prohibited by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The CJR article says she sent them the spreadsheet herself...

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/index.cfm

EDIT: I guess EEOC doesn't apply to businesses smaller than 15 people. The 'ol Discrimination Loophole for Small Businesses!

"Non-white"

"Non-male"

How does this spreadsheet not represent practices prohibited by the EEOC?

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/index.cfm

False equivalence. It's more like if I build a house based on someone else's plans, and then declare myself an architect.

AKQA is happy to make themselves sound smart in their video, when in fact all they did was run someone else's program, and without attribution. If that constitutes an AI practice then I'm in the wrong line of work - I should just be down at the city planning office photocopying other architects' plans.

It's not impressive. They didn't even build the tool, they just snagged the code from GitHub, said "This is AI!!!!" and without attributing it to the builder. It's cynical marketing ploy.

By performing a self-promotional stunt?

This isn't solving problems, it's riding the AI wave - and claiming the capability - while leveraging the work of others, without attribution. I mean they even use the damn program in their promotional video.

I'd be much more liable to support a "We AI and you can too!" than some cynical marketing activation.

A lot of digital agencies claim they have AI/ML capabilities and are really just using others' tools. It's a shame they lacked the integrity to attribute you.