Having spent a lot of time over the past several years thinking about and studying ethics in technology, the more I am convinced that the discussions about ethics in technology have a major, irreconcilable blind spot.

“If you are neutral in the face of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor,” as Desmond Tutu summarized.

Our discussion about eliminating bias in AI is an aggressive march towards neutrality. Our measure of fairness is a line drawn too early.

Maybe we shouldn’t be trying to eliminate bias in AI. Maybe we should be designing for bias in the favor of the oppressed. Worth thinking about.

Should we be eliminating power dynamics or inverting power dynamics? If we try to scrub power dynamics from a system too early in a neatly bounded space, we just let those power dynamics to creep back in, or we need those boundaries to be impenetrable.

My next ethics talk may just be a single slide that says REVOLUTION

LORDT. two black economists i really respect, @SandyDarity and @DarrickHamilton, just published a KILLER report debunking what they call 10 commonly-held myths about the racial wealth gap and how to close it. I'm gonna tweet the highlights. (full report:

first, defining the wealth gap. Black households hold
< 7 cents on the dollar compared to white households. The white household living near the poverty line typically has about $18k in wealth. Black households in similar economic straits typically have a median wealth near zero.

"At the other end of America’s economic spectrum, black households constitute less than 2 percent of those in the top one percent of the nation’s wealth distribution; white households constitute more than 96 percent of the wealthiest Americans."

that's the racial wealth gap. it's bad. google it. onto the myths."We contend that a number of ideas frequently touted as 'solutions' will not make headway in reducing black-white wealth disparities...While these steps are not necessarily undesirable, they are wholly inadequate."

"There are no actions that black Americans can take unilaterally that will have much of an effect on reducing the racial wealth gap. For the gap to be closed, America must undergo a vast social transformation."

me reading this out loud:

Uber IPO probably marks the top. I can see this $120 billion monstrosity coming toward us like a meteor.

Facebook came public valued at $104 billion. It seemed outrageous to the old timers but was already profitable.

Uber is allergic to profits, has burned through over $10 billion since its founding.

No one cares.

People are weary.

They get run down by the daily demands of life.

Work, stress, health, money.

It all adds up.

THEN, when their defenses are low, they get SLAMMED with very clever, psychologically manipulative marketing.

Game over. Broke and sick for life.

They used to stand a chance when it was newspaper and TV ads.

Now, with algorithms that prey on the data they themselves provide via social media and browsing habits? No chance.

Digging an endless hole.

Very smart, well educated people cannot overcome this trap.

And the few that do are tempted to use that knowledge to prey on others.

Those with less intelligence and agency are sheep being led to slaughter.

Leaders, those who have been given the ability to initiate change in the world (you know who you are), have a responsibility to fight against those who take advantage of others, to not sit quietly under the false flag of peace.

Everywhere you go, look around, nearly everyone looks miserable.

The most prosperous time to be alive in human history, and people walk like zombies through life.

They were told these material goods would bring fulfillment, instead they brought debt slavery.

Journalism has an elaborate code of ethics, but most people outside of journalism don’t know that, and that’s a problem. Sorry to "a thread" at you, but: a thread.

I spoke with a group of MDs who also have MBAs or PhDs and who work in hospital administration or public health or some other big-shot positions. They were in town for a workshop on how Washington works.

Educated, middle-aged, inquisitive people who told me they have been reading newspapers their whole lives. These were some of their questions.

“How much do advertisers influence your coverage?” Um, not at all. “Seriously, how much.” Seriously, not at all. The advertising department has nothing to do with the news department. We don’t know what ads they’re selling and they don’t know what stories we’re writing.

“How much does your owner influence your coverage?” Not at all. This isn’t the case at some news organizations, especially TV news, but major newspapers are not mouthpieces for their owners. Wonder where they got that idea.

There's a lot of news around the #MadebyGoogle event, so we're putting it all in this thread for your reading pleasure!

First off, here's a handy list of everything Google announced:

Then check out the Pixel 3 announcements.

The phone now includes wireless charging, increased specs, an extra camera, and a whole load of camera improvements.

For a more information on the Pixel 3's camera though, we put together this primer for you

We were also lucky enough to actually try out a Pixel 3 – and we have the evidence to prove it

Here’s the thing. Producers and studios, if they are really serious about hiring women directors, need to work on fostering talent that has been overlooked rather than simply chasing the overbooked few female directors.

You have to take chances on new voices to achieve parity.

Oh and hey, this may have been prompted by the Blum interview, but I'd like to state that this is a SYSTEMIC problem. It's not just one person or studio. It's industry wide.

And if the industry, as a whole, wants to change, it needs to examine how they make hiring decisions.

Blockchain is poised to be business disputer, however “Public Blockchains” and GDPR are incompatible. CNIL has provided guidance on #blockchain and GDRP and how it impacts the right to be forgotten. (Thread 1/10 ) #dragonchain

In essence, if the data stored on a blockchain is only referencing data stored off-chain, controllers may comply with requests for erasure from data subjects by removing the underlying data. (2/ 10)

Similarly, if the underlying data can only be accessed or verified via a specific private key, then making the private key inaccessible may also constitute an effect similar to the erasure of data. (3/ 10)

The CNIL provides some guidance on how individuals and companies might minimize their GDPR risk around blockchain technology. (4 / 10)

First, the CNIL recommends that companies seeking to process large amounts of personal data using blockchain technology rely on private blockchains over public blockchains. (5/10)

1. I wrote my PhD dissertation on the social function of humor (in literature & film) and here's the thing about "just joking."

2. You're never "just joking." Nobody is ever "just joking." Humor is a social act that performs a social function (always).

3. To say humor is social act is to say it is always in social context; we don't joke alone. Humor is a way we relate/interact with others.

4. Which is to say, humor is a way we construct identity - who we are in relation to others. We use humor to form groups...

5. ...and to find our individual place in or out of those groups. In short, joking/humor is one tool by which we assimilate or alienate.

Well that's another top leaker inside the fed. gov. rolled up. Great work, Rod.

People who think *nothing* is happening, that the McCabe grand jury is just for show, and all the other grand juries we don't know about, when thye are revealed, they are just for show too, are in for a rough next couple of weeks.

How many LEAKS did you see about the fact the DOJ/SDNY was about to return an indictment against another major leaker?

Remember, this is for posterity so please....be honest!

You won't see any LEAKS in major news media about the McCabe indictment, either. That will be a total surprise when the mainstream media is forced to cover it. They already memory-holed the fact fed prosecutors are using a grand jury to prosecute McCabe.

The Wolfe indictment hit as a complete surprise.
This Edwards indictment hit as a complete surprise.
The McCabe indictment won't be a complete surprise, the grand jury hearing months worth of evidence against him is already a matter of public record, but narratives die hard.

Here’s a quick, semi-bitter thread on why I’m building software products again 👇

I avoided building software for years after my first one failed and people told me it was too risky to do again. I ended up spending years writing books and courses. Some “failed”. They were just as risky.

People say “write a book before doing software, it’s smaller and faster”. But writing a book is damn hard. And for many of us, it takes longer than expected because you have to learn to write too.

Most bootstrappers and founders I know got into the products business because we wanted to do software. And how many of us are avoiding our biggest ambitions out of fear? When most of us are already experts in design or coding, *not* writing?

Don’t build the business of your dreams, it’s too risky. Instead, just work on something you don’t like for 3 years. Because that’s healthy.

The courage to be disliked, Ichiro Kishimi and Fumitake Koga. Heard good things, let’s dig in

Youth tells philosopher, life is hard and complicated and full of struggle. Philosopher says life is simple. Debate ensues

They discuss the subjectivity of water temperature - 18deg is cool when weather is hot, warm when weather is cold. No escape from your own subjectivity

P: Instead of lamenting about the world’s darkness, you could just remove the dark glasses.

Y: people cannot change. I am suffering because of my inability to change

Narrator: why is Y like this, so determined to refute P? Feelings of inferiority, self-pity, self-consciousness

Y: people want to change precisely because they can’t

P: why are you so adamant about this

Y: I have an incel friend

P: why do you think he can’t go out?

Y: background?

P: so cause and effect? determinism?

Y: ya

P: if determinism were true, wouldn’t everyone be incel

🤔

Y: so u saying past doesn’t matter

P: aye

Y: so there’s no explanation why my friend can’t go out?

P: your friend is insecure so he can’t go out. Flip it: he doesn’t want to go out, so he’s creating the anxiety.

Y: ridiculous. You’re saying he’s pretending to be sick

P: no

AP to Trump on climate: Scientists say we're getting to a point where it's irreversible

Trump: My uncle was a scientist...and "I didn’t talk to him about this particular subject, but I have a natural instinct for science, and I will say that you have scientists on both sides"

(THREAD) There is so much less to this headline than meets the eye—indeed, one could argue the story is interesting *only* in ways the headline doesn't hint at—that it's a shame Bloomberg, a great media outlet, published this in this way. Read on for more.

1/ *Everyone* knows that the next step in the Mueller probe will come after the November 6 election, as Mueller is currently foregoing any additional steps in his work because of the DOJ's recommended "60-day pre-election" rule against action on cases with political implications.

2/ *Everyone* knows that Mueller has completed or nearly completed the Obstruction portion of his investigation (indeed, might have completed it long ago), so even news that Mueller would be ready to issue findings on Obstruction sometime after November 6 would not be surprising.

3/ *Everyone* knows that Rosenstein fears for his job, and fears for Sessions' job, and fears for Mueller's job, so *no one* would be surprised to learn that Rosenstein was pressuring Mueller to release *some* sort of report shortly after November 6 in order to show his progress.

4/ *Everyone* knows that behind the scenes Trump has been pressuring the FBI/DOJ to "wrap up" their work, so—while it was not just inappropriate but possibly illegal for Trump to pressure Rosenstein during a recent plane trip—*no one* would be surprised to learn that he did that.

1/ So, there's a lot to say about this @BenSasse piece, including a contestable and contentious conception of the realm of political life. But ...

2/ I want instead to focus on this passage.

3/ I notice that he never defines this mythical past. It's just "the past." It partakes of Phoebe Buffay's division of the past into the "colonial era" and "yore."

4/ The problem here is that any attempt to specify this "past" more clearly would have to surrender Sasse's claims to universality.

5/ To the extent that "the whole town" turned out and rooted for the same team, Sasse is figuring authentic Americanness as involving small, racially and otherwise homogeneous communities.