That's not a compilation of articles. That's the way I explain it to my girlfriend (who does not know anything to computer science and machine learning) what I do, with simple and fun words (by no way, I want to be precise : There are way more articles who do it better than me.). That's a way to be more familiar with basic vocabulary of ML, to show there is no magic and that ML can be interesting.
I hope that would help people to discover ML and it will attract more people to it.
That is the kind of fun article I missed when I started to wonder what is ML.
I enjoyed your article. The style felt quirky, welcoming and grabs the attention of the average Joe. Please ignore the users who got triggered by the 'girlfriend' part, they are going to be offended by anything you do. I hope you keep posting!
It's a bit disingenuous to call the people here 'triggered'. No one seems emotionally distraught by the author's choice of words. Most of the comments here seem to be pitched in a constructive and explanatory manner (the meat of which you might entirely disagree with), but calling them 'triggered' only seems to try to undermine their opinion without actually providing any counterpoint.
Some of the response here I think would be avoided if you added a bit of an introduction to your girlfriend (this doesn't need to be identifying), as it seems to be being taken as a general "women don't know X" rather than "my girlfriend didn't know about X so this is how I explained it". This would also help set the scene a bit, who is the audience? Are they very, slightly, just somewhat or not at all technical?
Perhaps some additions that would be good are what are her questions? What's she asking you in response to these things? They have a good chance of being the kind of questions your readers might be asking too, and so having questions and your answers might be a nice thing to see.
I believe the original author meant "my girlfriend" as in, the girl he was with specifically, whom he had explained ML to, and kept a journal of.
I think it was uncharitable for you to assume he was implying anything about girls generally. If it had been "Machine Learning: for your girlfriend," that could have been reasonable to make that assumption over.
It is pretty obvious that the title is unnecessarily gendered, and that in this case it plays into broader stereotypes about women in STEM fields. I'm not sure why you are so insistent on defending it -- this is exactly the kind of thing that needs to stop happening if we really want a more inclusive atmosphere in the field.
The author recently tried to explain to his SO some tech stuff, including machine learning. Then, he wrote a blog post about it. However, he's not allowed to share it because... sexism? My ex and I followed very different career paths. I was clueless about fine art restoration and she didn't know much about programming. Yet we used to explain stuff to each other all the time, For Dummies style. OP follows the same quirky approach.
There's nothing inclusive in your attitude, only anger and blindness to the most obvious, harmless interpretation.
It makes the title less useful to focus on the gendered, social relationship than who the girlfriend was as a student. In the case of my friends, "girlfriend" could mean anything from "basically math illiterate" to "has a PhD in a technical field that isn't ML and doublechecks my proofs cause she's smarter than me".
The author decided not to tell us anything about who he taught -- where on that range she fell -- just what her social role was... His.
That's what people are objecting to: in an article about teaching your gf something, why not make it about who she is as a student and what she learned instead of her social status as your mate?
It's that fundamental phrasing and framing of her, as it being more important to know her social status than anything about her academics, that people object to.
(All that aside, this is a silly thing to complain about. But it isn't nothing.)
No, you! If patronizing is the problem, you are way more guilty of it, making demands mostly devoid of explanations or references, insinuating a stereotype of an exclusive culture, while OP's intention is clearly inclusive (going by the title).
Edit: I have to redact a little bit, clearly "my girlfried" is possessive and exclusive, I feel slightly offended. I hope this sounds like sarcasm, although it is petty.
I explain tech things to my wife with a simple approach, and she explains biology to me with a simple approach. We're both technical and educated, but we have our own fields of expertise.
This isn't about "showing off morality." It's about making the tech community welcoming to people of all genders. Your attitude is part of the reason that doing so is so difficult.
Well I hope you are not equating the discussion happening in this thread with the 'political correctness police jumping on someone'. The only discussion happening here seems to be about whether it is appropriate or not. No one is suggesting that the author be punished or admonished for it.
It seems like a very valid thing to discuss, and suggesting that people might be 'triggered' for even bringing it up only serves to undermine a legitimate discussion on it.
No one here seems emotionally distraught by the author's words. Rather, all of the discussions about the inappropriateness of the remarks seem to be pitched in a constructive and explanatory way, without regard to whether they were offended by them or not.
I was hoping that the first part would have an explainer to justify the mention of the GF. Something like, "My girlfriend is not a programmer and has never taken computer science classes. The following drawing are what I used to explain ML to her."
I don't care for this explanation style as it is really hand-wavy and makes machine learning seem very magical. I prefer explanations working through a simple regression, k-means example, or a baby decision tree. These are easy to show graphically (in two dimensions).
OT: I agree with some people here that the "girlfriend" part seems a bit condescending. I also think it was not meant that way. User IanCal here suggested some helpful tips to avoid that vibe, I think he is correct.
But to those attacking OP for this tiny bit of "un-PC-ness" in the title: Just stop. Go on with your day and don't read this if you don't like his style, or offer helpful feedback like IanCal.
I'll wager that this constant bombardment of PC enforcement created the sentiment that allowed Donald Trump to say the stupidest things in the world and feel like a breath of fresh air just because he didn't care about being PC.
Just use Occam's razor here. The simplest explanation is that his girlfriend is non-technical. Therefore, the explanation will be simple and approachable to non-experts.
He could have had a long title that said that, or he could have expressed it much more succinctly as he did.
You have to actively read more into it to find a way to be offended by it.
A problem like sexism is so wide-spread and deep-rooted in the software industry that it's imperative to _not_ just ignore every "one-off" occurrence, but instead to point it out.
A criticism of the choice of language used in this article is a very valid criticism to make, and doesn't invalidate the usefulness of the article as a whole. It might just help the author understand how he can improve his future writings!
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. --Cardinal Richelieu
Persecuting people for not stripping personal accounts of details that happen to match forbidden stereotypes seems rather oppressive. And like something that will tend to de-legitimize the cause you're using to justify said persecution.
Hacker News has a policy of avoiding political articles. The internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. Therefore Hacker News commenters post off-topic politics.
Hacker News could really benefit from a sister site that focuses on current politics and political issues as a way to draw it away from Hacker News itself.
Honestly, though, that's what 4chan did with /b/ and that seems to work. Though externally most people associate 4chan with /b/, it does free up the other communities on the site to run smoothly, or so I'm told.
Still, judging by most of those comments in here I think people are just eager for an excuse to "call out" someone's missteps. They say it's just a suggestion, or a recommendation, but the implicit warning is there: do what we say or we'll make you hurt. The fear is obvious, given the number of green throwaways people have made just to try to have a rational argument.
AUTHOR HERE. For those who have been "chocked" or "disappointed" by the title of this series. All my apologies, but I assume this title. I did not wanted to offense anyone.
Yes, this is how I explain it to her, there is no sexism in there. She is very smart, but not in the same domains, she loves history and books which I do not know anything about, so she wanted to understand what I do, just curiosity.
It won't be about her, I'm not a pervert to show her in my blog. But she inspired me this series. So, why not refereing to her in the title? That's a bit like a tribute to her who inspired me, that's sentimental. No offense.
(BTW, I she is a bit confused about some reactions, and she is glad I was thinking to her when I wrote those posts)
Again apoligies for those who thought it was sexist or anything else. By no mean I wanted to offend you.
There are a multitude of political opinions out there (which does not mean they are bad ideas), and a large number of people who like to criticize others based on this because they get to feel superior. Such people also think that everything (including the personal) is political and make no distinction between the intentional and unintentional.
It's wise to just ignore them when the criticism is tangential. One only has finite mental bandwidth for these things, there is no way to cover the full combinatorial explosion of things that _could_ be interpreted as offensive.
Unsupervised learning is like playing "one of these things is not like the others". Unsupervised learning also happens "in a vacuum", in that nothing means anything / relates to the outside world.
AUTHOR HERE. No more "sexism", I changed the title of the series to "Inky Machine Learning", to refer to my ink drawing and my inky fingers. Old pages related to this does not exist anymore.
By no mean I wanted to hurt anybody, all my apologies.
51 comments
[ 5.0 ms ] story [ 105 ms ] threadI hope that would help people to discover ML and it will attract more people to it. That is the kind of fun article I missed when I started to wonder what is ML.
Some of the response here I think would be avoided if you added a bit of an introduction to your girlfriend (this doesn't need to be identifying), as it seems to be being taken as a general "women don't know X" rather than "my girlfriend didn't know about X so this is how I explained it". This would also help set the scene a bit, who is the audience? Are they very, slightly, just somewhat or not at all technical?
Perhaps some additions that would be good are what are her questions? What's she asking you in response to these things? They have a good chance of being the kind of questions your readers might be asking too, and so having questions and your answers might be a nice thing to see.
I think it was uncharitable for you to assume he was implying anything about girls generally. If it had been "Machine Learning: for your girlfriend," that could have been reasonable to make that assumption over.
Edit: revising, shortening, done~
There's nothing inclusive in your attitude, only anger and blindness to the most obvious, harmless interpretation.
The author decided not to tell us anything about who he taught -- where on that range she fell -- just what her social role was... His.
That's what people are objecting to: in an article about teaching your gf something, why not make it about who she is as a student and what she learned instead of her social status as your mate?
It's that fundamental phrasing and framing of her, as it being more important to know her social status than anything about her academics, that people object to.
(All that aside, this is a silly thing to complain about. But it isn't nothing.)
Edit: I have to redact a little bit, clearly "my girlfried" is possessive and exclusive, I feel slightly offended. I hope this sounds like sarcasm, although it is petty.
Maybe you should stop shoving politics (no matter how well intentioned) into everything.
When my girlfriend and I pursue things intellectually, we feel sentimental about it to some extent.
I can sympathize with OP for choosing the risk of uncharitable readings
It's also largely possible OP did not anticipate the risk of uncharitable readings, and it was not an informed decision
I can understand both an uninformed and informed decision on the part of OP
Edit: clarify, shorten, extend, extend, done ~
"Elementary school unions explained to my husband"
Would that make you feel like the education community is unwelcoming of all genders?
I know dads feel excluded because a number of educational things specifically mention moms.
It's obvious the guy that wrote these articles isn't trying to trigger anyone, so can we all just not get triggered?
It seems like a very valid thing to discuss, and suggesting that people might be 'triggered' for even bringing it up only serves to undermine a legitimate discussion on it.
No one here seems emotionally distraught by the author's words. Rather, all of the discussions about the inappropriateness of the remarks seem to be pitched in a constructive and explanatory way, without regard to whether they were offended by them or not.
The ancestor comments by andendau and dopu are admonishing him for it.
>He should change it. Regardless of the intention, this is how it will be interpreted.
Seems more like an advisement than an admonishment. Perhaps I should have said no one is rebuking them for it.
Either way, I don't see this as the 'political correctness police jumping on them'. It's not like people are organizing a lynch mob for the author.
Hey OP? Can you do a matrix multiplication? They teach this scat in first-year medical school. This isn't ML moron.
Kind of like ELI5 -- not actually a five year old, but literally taken, it would sound fairly strange.
Just use Occam's razor here. The simplest explanation is that his girlfriend is non-technical. Therefore, the explanation will be simple and approachable to non-experts.
He could have had a long title that said that, or he could have expressed it much more succinctly as he did.
You have to actively read more into it to find a way to be offended by it.
A criticism of the choice of language used in this article is a very valid criticism to make, and doesn't invalidate the usefulness of the article as a whole. It might just help the author understand how he can improve his future writings!
Persecuting people for not stripping personal accounts of details that happen to match forbidden stereotypes seems rather oppressive. And like something that will tend to de-legitimize the cause you're using to justify said persecution.
I will denounce all such posts. This is not PC, it's stopping bigotry wherever it lives.
Hacker News could really benefit from a sister site that focuses on current politics and political issues as a way to draw it away from Hacker News itself.
Honestly, though, that's what 4chan did with /b/ and that seems to work. Though externally most people associate 4chan with /b/, it does free up the other communities on the site to run smoothly, or so I'm told.
Still, judging by most of those comments in here I think people are just eager for an excuse to "call out" someone's missteps. They say it's just a suggestion, or a recommendation, but the implicit warning is there: do what we say or we'll make you hurt. The fear is obvious, given the number of green throwaways people have made just to try to have a rational argument.
There are a multitude of political opinions out there (which does not mean they are bad ideas), and a large number of people who like to criticize others based on this because they get to feel superior. Such people also think that everything (including the personal) is political and make no distinction between the intentional and unintentional.
It's wise to just ignore them when the criticism is tangential. One only has finite mental bandwidth for these things, there is no way to cover the full combinatorial explosion of things that _could_ be interpreted as offensive.