6 ms·

> Make the internet affordable and accessible to everyone > 1. By crafting policies that address the needs of systematically excluded > groups > a. Des

by geowwy 7y ago

> Make the internet affordable and accessible to everyone > 1. By crafting policies that address the needs of systematically excluded > groups > a. Designing gender responsive and inclusive data plans targeting women and > other systematically excluded groups. What's he suggesting? Give women discounted internet?

function_seven 7y ago
For mobile users: > Make the internet affordable and accessible to everyone > 1. By crafting policies that address the needs of systematically excluded groups > a. Designing gender responsive and inclusive data plans targeting women and other systematically excluded groups
- tedunangst 7y ago
  So which gender gets the most data?
bArray 7y ago
> What's he suggesting? The fact that it is ambiguous leaves room for it to mean whatever the controlling party wants it to mean. As long as people can't agree on something as fundamental as the goal, it's doomed to fail. > Give women discounted internet? Somehow I don't think he was suggesting a "pink tax" or some kind of "ladies internet" that filters some explicit pictures. I think "inclusive" roughly translates as favorable in sentences like these. Surely the fact that the internet is the exact same price for everybody, regardless of group characteristics, is the ultimate goal? I don't think it is sensible to begin adding bias where there currently is none.
- mirimir 7y ago
  > Somehow I don't think he was suggesting a "pink tax" or some kind of "ladies internet" that filters some explicit pictures. It's my impression that the price of internet access is at least somewhat proportional to local cost of living. And I don't see why there shouldn't be income-based discounts. But, perhaps bizarrely enough, I do think that filtered internet access is a very sensible idea. I mean, it's not uncommon for parents to restrict access by their underage children. HN has "maxvisit" and "minaway" settings so users can manage their usage. And many search sites have "safe search" settings. So why not let users set that up at the ISP level?
  - bArray 7y ago
    > It's my impression that the price of internet access is at > least somewhat proportional to local cost of living. Typically as is the cost of food, housing, wages, etc. > And I don't see why there shouldn't be income-based > discounts. Is it really the job of the ISP to account for such things? Not that I agree with this, but: Surely it would make more sense to balance income at the point of it arriving in your account, not when you go to spend it? I don't think we want private companies to become political or biased in any way, I think this should be the soul responsibility of accountable politicians, rather than unaccountable corporate entities. > it's not uncommon for parents to restrict access by their > underage children > HN has "maxvisit" and "minaway" settings so users can > manage their usage. And many search sites have "safe > search" settings. > So why not let users set that up at the ISP level? Firstly I believe people should have the ability to choose what filters they impose on themselves, such filters should never be on by default. I can fully understand and respect the cases for wanting such filtering, but it can also be extremely dangerous. Secondly I believe in most cases that such filters do already exist - you can request such things from your ISP, purchase routers that filter such traffic, install software onto devices that perform blocking, etc. The options exist and are actively used. One real example I remember was a parent installing a simple filter on their family computer (for their child). It would filter websites and key-words/phrases from websites, such as "sex". It so happened there was an incident reported by a local news website with something like "Local Child Sex Offender Still Not Caught", which of course was filtered to "Local Offender Still Not Caught". Their child was out playing in this quite high risk area and the parents were completely unaware of the risks. The point is, that when acting in what we believe to be in the best interest of ourselves and others, we can actually cause more damage than good.
    - zzo38computer 7y ago
      > The point is, that when acting in what we believe to be in the best interest of ourselves and others, we can actually cause more damage than good. I do agree; you should not add such filters which cause those problems. But that is the customer's own decision what software to run on their computer, and not mine.
  - 7y ago
leppr 7y ago
"It's not racist and sexist, it's race and gender responsive."
- laichzeit0 7y ago
  But I thought “race” doesn’t exist? And which of the 200 genders specifically?
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > But I thought “race” doesn’t exist? There's a difference between being a social construct and not existing. The people who reject “race” as an inherent physical trait don't usually argue that it doesn't exist, but that it is a social construct, essentially identical in nature to ethnicity, which is uncontroversially purely a social construct.
    - lidHanteyk 7y ago
      It's actually worse than that; any possible definition of race is incoherent in the face of pedigree collapse, so that people who believe and act as if race were a social construction are wrong, in the same way that people who believe and act as if horoscopes predict personality and psychics predict the future are wrong. A social construction is a shared fantasy; it's something which doesn't exist but which humans emphatically insist is real. To use an analogy, a reflection doesn't exist either, but that doesn't stop a mirror from causing animals to act as if they were standing in front of themselves. (The photons are real; the illusion that they produce in the mind of the viewer is not.)
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        > It's actually worse than that; any possible definition of race is incoherent in the face of pedigree collapse I think you are confusing race with races; that definitions of races are incoherent is fully encompassed by the race-as-social-construct school. (Social constructs need not be incoherent, but the incoherence of race is not something unmentioned by those seeing race as a social construct.) > A social construction is a shared fantasy; it's something which doesn't exist but which humans emphatically insist is real. That's...emphatically false. A social construct is a real phenomenon. It may or may not internally reference some other thing which does not exist in the manner depicted in that reference (as the argument goes that images of race do, but law is equally a social construct but does not inherently do this, though particular constructs of law might.) And social constructs are often incompletely shared; there is nothing unusual about race in that regard, as you seem to be referencing (though your actual argument is somewhat opaque.) > To use an analogy, a reflection doesn't exist either, Reflections are phenomena which certainly do exist. Now, they might trick the viewer into believing they are images of an object which does not exist (or, at least, does not exist in the position and orientation suggested by the appearance of the reflection) but the reflection itself absolutely does exist. Likewise social constructs exist whether or not they reference physical things which do not as if they did.
goatinaboat 7y ago
Give women discounted internet? It’s funny, if you look at the stats then you will see Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat etc are all majority female. The only social network that has gender parity is LinkedIn. HN may be predominantly male (no one knows for sure) but it’s a rounding error in terms of user numbers. There’s no male equivalent of Pinterest (Reddit isn’t even close)

by geowwy 7y ago

function_seven 7y ago

For mobile users: > Make the internet affordable and accessible to everyone > 1. By crafting policies that address the needs of systematically excluded groups > a. Designing gender responsive and inclusive data plans targeting women and other systematically excluded groups

tedunangst 7y ago
So which gender gets the most data?

bArray 7y ago

> What's he suggesting? The fact that it is ambiguous leaves room for it to mean whatever the controlling party wants it to mean. As long as people can't agree on something as fundamental as the goal, it's doomed to fail. > Give women discounted internet? Somehow I don't think he was suggesting a "pink tax" or some kind of "ladies internet" that filters some explicit pictures. I think "inclusive" roughly translates as favorable in sentences like these. Surely the fact that the internet is the exact same price for everybody, regardless of group characteristics, is the ultimate goal? I don't think it is sensible to begin adding bias where there currently is none.

mirimir 7y ago
> Somehow I don't think he was suggesting a "pink tax" or some kind of "ladies internet" that filters some explicit pictures. It's my impression that the price of internet access is at least somewhat proportional to local cost of living. And I don't see why there shouldn't be income-based discounts. But, perhaps bizarrely enough, I do think that filtered internet access is a very sensible idea. I mean, it's not uncommon for parents to restrict access by their underage children. HN has "maxvisit" and "minaway" settings so users can manage their usage. And many search sites have "safe search" settings. So why not let users set that up at the ISP level?
- bArray 7y ago
  > It's my impression that the price of internet access is at > least somewhat proportional to local cost of living. Typically as is the cost of food, housing, wages, etc. > And I don't see why there shouldn't be income-based > discounts. Is it really the job of the ISP to account for such things? Not that I agree with this, but: Surely it would make more sense to balance income at the point of it arriving in your account, not when you go to spend it? I don't think we want private companies to become political or biased in any way, I think this should be the soul responsibility of accountable politicians, rather than unaccountable corporate entities. > it's not uncommon for parents to restrict access by their > underage children > HN has "maxvisit" and "minaway" settings so users can > manage their usage. And many search sites have "safe > search" settings. > So why not let users set that up at the ISP level? Firstly I believe people should have the ability to choose what filters they impose on themselves, such filters should never be on by default. I can fully understand and respect the cases for wanting such filtering, but it can also be extremely dangerous. Secondly I believe in most cases that such filters do already exist - you can request such things from your ISP, purchase routers that filter such traffic, install software onto devices that perform blocking, etc. The options exist and are actively used. One real example I remember was a parent installing a simple filter on their family computer (for their child). It would filter websites and key-words/phrases from websites, such as "sex". It so happened there was an incident reported by a local news website with something like "Local Child Sex Offender Still Not Caught", which of course was filtered to "Local Offender Still Not Caught". Their child was out playing in this quite high risk area and the parents were completely unaware of the risks. The point is, that when acting in what we believe to be in the best interest of ourselves and others, we can actually cause more damage than good.
  - zzo38computer 7y ago
    > The point is, that when acting in what we believe to be in the best interest of ourselves and others, we can actually cause more damage than good. I do agree; you should not add such filters which cause those problems. But that is the customer's own decision what software to run on their computer, and not mine.
- 7y ago

leppr 7y ago

"It's not racist and sexist, it's race and gender responsive."

laichzeit0 7y ago
But I thought “race” doesn’t exist? And which of the 200 genders specifically?
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > But I thought “race” doesn’t exist? There's a difference between being a social construct and not existing. The people who reject “race” as an inherent physical trait don't usually argue that it doesn't exist, but that it is a social construct, essentially identical in nature to ethnicity, which is uncontroversially purely a social construct.
  - lidHanteyk 7y ago
    It's actually worse than that; any possible definition of race is incoherent in the face of pedigree collapse, so that people who believe and act as if race were a social construction are wrong, in the same way that people who believe and act as if horoscopes predict personality and psychics predict the future are wrong. A social construction is a shared fantasy; it's something which doesn't exist but which humans emphatically insist is real. To use an analogy, a reflection doesn't exist either, but that doesn't stop a mirror from causing animals to act as if they were standing in front of themselves. (The photons are real; the illusion that they produce in the mind of the viewer is not.)
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      > It's actually worse than that; any possible definition of race is incoherent in the face of pedigree collapse I think you are confusing race with races; that definitions of races are incoherent is fully encompassed by the race-as-social-construct school. (Social constructs need not be incoherent, but the incoherence of race is not something unmentioned by those seeing race as a social construct.) > A social construction is a shared fantasy; it's something which doesn't exist but which humans emphatically insist is real. That's...emphatically false. A social construct is a real phenomenon. It may or may not internally reference some other thing which does not exist in the manner depicted in that reference (as the argument goes that images of race do, but law is equally a social construct but does not inherently do this, though particular constructs of law might.) And social constructs are often incompletely shared; there is nothing unusual about race in that regard, as you seem to be referencing (though your actual argument is somewhat opaque.) > To use an analogy, a reflection doesn't exist either, Reflections are phenomena which certainly do exist. Now, they might trick the viewer into believing they are images of an object which does not exist (or, at least, does not exist in the position and orientation suggested by the appearance of the reflection) but the reflection itself absolutely does exist. Likewise social constructs exist whether or not they reference physical things which do not as if they did.

goatinaboat 7y ago

Give women discounted internet? It’s funny, if you look at the stats then you will see Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat etc are all majority female. The only social network that has gender parity is LinkedIn. HN may be predominantly male (no one knows for sure) but it’s a rounding error in terms of user numbers. There’s no male equivalent of Pinterest (Reddit isn’t even close)