If I toss a coin 5 times and get 1H 4T, there's not a journal on the planet that would accept that as proof that it was a loaded coin, not to mention that the 5 on the list were specifically selected to prove a point (or were Clippy, Microsoft Bob, and Google Now girls as well?); and even if we did accept it as a rule (even though it isn't) it still doesn't follow that there was misogynist intent driving it; that's something you decided for yourselves.
which is really more a reflection on the people debating this
I'd throw that right back at you. People arguing in its support seem a lot more likely to look for secret misogynist motives in the person they're talking to in order to support their argument by ad hominem. It suggests an "our team versus their team" attitude where being on the correct team is more important than being fair or accurate.
Siri and Alexa are still around. As I said in another comment, you have to really be hanging onto a ton of confirmation bias to do this much ignoring of the examples that don’t fit your conclusion.
Your analogy is falling apart even more since it’s now mixing up the idea of a real secretary being replaced with a bot except in the analogy the real secretary was also a bot…?
Honestly it reads like you just want to be offended.
That analogy doesn’t even slightly work. AIs now are called ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Grok, Llama, Perplexity, Meta AI, DeepSeek… all genderless names. Only one, Claude, has a male name.
LOL, the sole one single point I made in my post is that I only ever see assertions without evidence, and your response is a bit of handwaving and an ad hominem. Thanks for demonstrating my point so perfectly.
I've been careful the last few years to delete all my old PII everywhere online and minimize my engagement with any cloud provider.
Only just recently discovered that every photo anyone in my family has taken of me in the past few years has been auto-tagging me and sending that information to either Google or Apple, tied to my phone number (since it's picked from their Contacts) and geolocation, and I never consented to any of it.
It's interesting you cite that article, because it was written in 2018 and presented feminist arguments that we should stop making AI assistants female-coded. Now that the industry has done that exact thing, it's being criticized for it? It looks a lot of a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't.
I’m torn on this because there definitely is a worrying increase in bigotry and tech bro culture, but at the same time OP’s “it’s so blatant once you notice it” could just as easily be “it’s so blatant once you’ve adopted confirmation bias enough to handwave away the exceptions”.
Today (Shrove Tuesday) is Pancake Day in many countries. IHOP in the Philippines closes their branches that day due to it being a holiday there. Their manager is the most incompetent marketer in the world for not even attempting to make Pancake Day a thing in the Philippines.
Does it count if it was 2020 and the person is also your age? I feel like a LOT of people have a weirdly revisionist memory of the first few months of the pandemic.
Haven’t had that yet, but having travelled a lot I find it jarring how many other countries seem to think that Thatcher was a great leader to look up to, and not a dreadful callous nightmare who sold the country out on multiple levels to create the illusion of prosperity.
I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not because that is an awful argument. The housing market isn’t this perfectly liquid thing where there’s always another house to choose from that fits all your requirements a reasonable distance from your workplace.
She’s on a tear because she thought she’d get a top cabinet position, only to discover that Trump along with everyone else in the party thinks she’s a moron.
If I toss a coin 5 times and get 1H 4T, there's not a journal on the planet that would accept that as proof that it was a loaded coin, not to mention that the 5 on the list were specifically selected to prove a point (or were Clippy, Microsoft Bob, and Google Now girls as well?); and even if we did accept it as a rule (even though it isn't) it still doesn't follow that there was misogynist intent driving it; that's something you decided for yourselves.
I'd throw that right back at you. People arguing in its support seem a lot more likely to look for secret misogynist motives in the person they're talking to in order to support their argument by ad hominem. It suggests an "our team versus their team" attitude where being on the correct team is more important than being fair or accurate.