Transcript
Mastodon posts by @trenchworms@eldritch.cafe:
super revealing of the misogyny inherent to the space that "AI assistants" stopped being given feminine-coded names the moment tech chuds thought they were developing higher levels of autonomy
"i TELL Alexa what to do. i COLLABROATE with Chudbot. i will not reflect on this hierarchy at all."
... This is not a made-up thought experiment though? We do have empirical data? Out of the five (5) companies mentioned in this thread, one (1) does not fit the pattern outlined in the OP. Seems pretty clear that something is going on. Unless you can point to some kind of sampling bias (by finding additional counterexamples), I don't see how you can just chalk it up to confirmation bias.
Sure, it could all be coincidence, in the same way that maybe the dog really did eat my homework. Not a very convincing explanation.
Interestingly I never see this kilometric leeway given to tech companies when discussing, say, their technically unproven surveillance practices, which pretty much everyone readily accept as fact.
That so many people are fighting this particular point is inherently curious. For "some reason" accusations of misogyny require a much higher burden of proof than many other kinds of accusations, which is really more a reflection on the people debating this than on the tech companies themselves (which we already know are run by complete and utter human shitstains anyway).
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.