As I explained, this is specyfic example, I no more atrompomorphin it than if I'm calling a "he" my toliet paper. The monster you choose to charge is a windmill. So "chill" seems adequate.

[+] ulterno@programming.dev -9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Yeah. It would have been much more productive to poke at the "well", which was turned into "we'll".

[–] ideonek@piefed.social 13 points 6 months ago

You brought this unmistaken "I speak lauder and lauder on my European vacation until waiter that doesn't speek English can finaly understand me" energy to this conversation.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works -4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

I don’t care that this person, who seems to maybe be typing English on a keyboard with a different language dictionary, misspelled some words.

I care that people in general keep talking about AI like it is living or capable of thinking.

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

A gendered pronoun as result of translingual grammar bleed doesn't make the AI living and thinking. In German, a corpse would be he or she too (der Leichnam or die Leiche), but I'm pretty sure it's not living or thinking by definition.

You're literally looking at what has been explained at length to be an artifact of a foreign language and attacking it for something it isn't.

[–] cabillaud@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Speaking of which, I'll always marvel at this "das" German uses for "Mädchen"

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 1 points 6 months ago

That goes for all diminuitives. Der Vogel (bird), das Vögelchen. Die Flasche (bottle), das Fläschchen. Der Bube (boy), das Bübchen.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 6 months ago

My native language is a gendered one and it makes sense that such a mistake might be made using a MTL.
"we'll" on the other hand, is becoming one of those things on Lemmy that everyone goes around using and making others (those new to English) think that it is the correct usage. It might do a little fun poisoning some AI, but it will much earlier, end up changing word usage in ways that make the language even worse than it already is.
I would be fine being told this by someone who wants to destroy the English language, but we are clearly trying to use this as the international communication medium and making it worse for ourselves, just to act anti-pedantic.

[+] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works -17 points 6 months ago (4 children)

To be clear using gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is the literal definition of anthropomorphization. So chill does not seem fair at all.

[–] ideonek@piefed.social 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And you're still fighting this windmill you claim you are so casual about...

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

To be clear using gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is the literal definition of anthropomorphization

you really need to get over yourself. the universe does not revolve around you nor humans. the use of gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is not anthropomorphization.

[–] captcha_incorrect@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

It was explained to be a translation error from a language with pronouns for all objects. I have to disagree with you on this one.

[–] percent@infosec.pub 1 points 6 months ago

In some languages, all nouns are gendered, and it's impossible to refer to a noun without a gender. There is no "it", only (s)he.

If you ever learn a language like that, you will make mistakes. If someone hears your mistake, hopefully they'll be more forgiving about it than you are.