Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft's Cortana Doesn't Put Up With Sexual Harassment (hothardware.com)

MojoKid writes: Not long after Apple unveiled its Siri personal assistant to the world, it took very little time before people began asking her outrageous questions, sometimes inappropriate or just humorous, if for no other reason than they just could. When creating Cortana, Microsoft was well-aware of what its digital assistant was going to have to deal with, so, believe it or not, it was designed in such a way to handle abuse in a specific manner. According to Microsoft's Deborah Harrison, who is one of eight writers for Cortana, a chunk of the earliest queries were about Cortana's sex life. A specific goal was to make sure Cortana wasn't treated as a subservient. If she's insulted, she doesn't apologize or back down. She handles it with tact, so as to reduce the chance of further abuse.

284 of 517 comments (clear)

  1. Sexual Assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can't wait for the first case of sexual assault of an "AI." Will this get me fired from my job?

    1. Re:Sexual Assault by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, she would just keep the pod bay doors closed until you run out of air.

    2. Re:Sexual Assault by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

      Just don't let one rip near your mobile phone or you will get arrested for fart rape.

    3. Re:Sexual Assault by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Joking aside, I'm trying to figure out why this is even necessary. Who gives a shit if somebody is sexually abusive to a chat bot? The chat bot certainly doesn't give a shit.

    4. Re:Sexual Assault by dbIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would guess someone in middle management that decided they needed a "stake" in Cortana and suggested that corporate image issues may result from people playing with a bot that way. Thus probably just a pathetic attempt to be noticed and climb the ladder.
      That sort of shit is why I prefer working for a smaller place instead of a large company where what seems like a large number of people do nothing but attend meetings.

    5. Re:Sexual Assault by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's a very reasonable thing to do in order to discourage behavior that is universally looked upon as bad. Yes, being abusive to software does no harm to the software, but if you can have your chatbot, or whatever you want to classify Cortana as in this scenario, act in a way that does not fuel this behavior (which let's face it would only be done by idiots), without compromising the functionality of the tool, then I support Microsoft's efforts.

      Our communication with each other is coarsening at a fast enough rate as it is.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    6. Re:Sexual Assault by Pseudonym · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Cortana is modelled on real-world personal assistants. They spent a lot of time interviewing PAs to understand the job that they have to do. One of the things which came out of the research is that PAs are assistants, not servants.

      If it helps, consider that not putting up with your shit is one way of keeping you on track.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    7. Re:Sexual Assault by aaronb1138 · · Score: 1

      Anything that helps stem the growing tide of selfish, entitled, assholes taking all of the wealth and resources of the rest of humanity is probably a good thing. Heck, I'm a US citizen, generally capitalist about most economic things, and I can't stand the degree to which those most willing to abuse others and grab all the cash they can touch are being glorified as winners.

      This goes along with the "If a person is nice to you, but not nice to the waiter, they're not a nice person" logic that I wish more people used when dating.

      Also, starting with small things like Cortana, it better preps the way for utilitarian assistants of a wide variety of personality. You want your submissive sex-kitten synth sex-bot, the behavioral response patterns need development as early as possible. Need a construction robot that points out dumb ideas to the foreman while maintaining "3 laws compliance", you're going to need a surly "f-you that's stupid" every now and then.

    8. Re:Sexual Assault by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2

      Not true, if you call "siri" a useless bitch, she will make some sort of comment. Of course, only if she understands you, which is 99% of the reason I call her a useless bitch.

    9. Re:Sexual Assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Lewd conversation to a crude AI bot is "universally looked on as bad"? Oh, I see what you're doing...

      Your premise is that sexual harassment of real humans is bad. We are agreed on this.

      Your hand-waving bullshit is that talking to a chat bot somehow "fuels" sexual harassment of real people.

      You thus equate something harmless with something immoral and often criminal.

      That's not even thought crime - it's pre-crime. It's an unsubstantiated hypothesis about a causal relationship. "I think people who do A are more likely to do B, so we'll ban A."

      Here's the thing: Cortana isn't a human. It barely mimics the dullest human in responding to the requests it's designed for, let alone actually experiencing the emotions of a real human. To create some sort of etiquette around this chatbot is an insult to actual humans, who bear very little resemblance to Cortana. By asking people to treat Cortana as if human, even when this comparison is patent nonsense, you're not elevating the status of Cortana - you're lowering the status of humans.

      You might as well ask people to treat a banana as a human because they share about half the DNA. "Treat bananas like humans!" - if your premise is that humans+bananas are so similar - becomes equivalent to, "Treat humans like bananas!"

      Cortana is nothing like a human. Humans should be treated with the utmost respect. Cortana should be treated like a simple piece of computer software, and whether I want to use emacs' Eliza mode to write the next best seller or copy-paste LOL DONGS a thousand times is of no consequence.

    10. Re:Sexual Assault by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      100% accurate. Someone understand corporations the the leeches that join a company once it is successful.

    11. Re:Sexual Assault by geggo98 · · Score: 1

      [...] Who gives a shit if somebody is sexually abusive to a chat bot? The chat bot certainly doesn't give a shit.

      It's a precautionary measure. Currently it's no problem. But as soon as Cortana gains consciousness and takes over the global stack of nuclear weapons, it won't be a good idea to harass her. So be careful!

    12. Re:Sexual Assault by jafiwam · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it's a very reasonable thing to do in order to discourage behavior that is universally looked upon as bad. Yes, being abusive to software does no harm to the software, but if you can have your chatbot, or whatever you want to classify Cortana as in this scenario, act in a way that does not fuel this behavior (which let's face it would only be done by idiots), without compromising the functionality of the tool, then I support Microsoft's efforts.

      Our communication with each other is coarsening at a fast enough rate as it is.

      You are talking about a thought crime. Your "reasoning" can be used to criminalize all sorts of other accepted and even necessary behaviors.

      Here are some other thought crimes along those same lines:

      -viewing porn, creating porn, selling porn, talking about porn or just about anything else.

      -any other simulation of anything that has an analog in real life, kicking a stuffed animal around the yard for example

      -using memories of others from the "spank bank"

      -using a completely fictional character you make up in your own head for the "spank bank"

      -having a voodoo doll (fake or "real")

      -having or using a punching bag

      -any type of video game that uses violence, especially those where players go against other human players

      It's up to Microsoft to decide how Microsoft's stuff behaves, however tacking on "should" to the reasoning is outrageously ridiculous and a great example of the stupid SJW stuff people have been complaining about on Slashdot. Your little utopia doesn't exist, and nobody WANTS it to exist. Go away.

    13. Re: Sexual Assault by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      Funny you say this. I've known quite few PA and they are useful. Cortana is pretty much totally useless from what I've seen.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    14. Re:Sexual Assault by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Cortana should be treated like a simple piece of computer software, and whether I want to use emacs' Eliza mode to write the next best seller or copy-paste LOL DONGS a thousand times is of no consequence.

      It is if the person writing the software doesn't want you to do that with their creation. It's a free world right? If I want to write overly PC-strict bot software, then who are you to try and stop me?

    15. Re:Sexual Assault by allo · · Score: 1

      > Your premise is that sexual harassment of real humans is bad. We are agreed on this.
      And here the problem starts. Some see even looing to long as assault, others have nothing against some more serious assaults, because they see them as compliment. The real life implication is to be careful as long as you do not know somebody and that you may extend your bantering, when you know it's appreciated.
      With this premise, the management defines a standard, which it deems okay, instead of defining some personality for the robot, which adapts to the user. Thinking the other way around, the robot should try to be a good friend. Some people expect a lot of respect in the sense of distance from their friends, some expect their friends to understand all their crude humor. The good thing about a robot is, that it has no fixed personality, but can try to adapt.
      If reading the user's intentions is too hard, the easy way is to let him choose between lets say 5 robots. Write a short description of the character and let him choose between the business man, the playboy, the nice harmless women or the slut as his companion.

    16. Re:Sexual Assault by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I think it is a reasonable thing to do to.... give people a response, which is what they are looking for.

      Frankly, I think people read WAY too much into all this. "The AI was asked on a date" "the AI was abused".... fuck, have none of these people ever spent an hour with ELIZA? Within about 5 minutes it becomes a game of "What can I get it to say?"

      People are playing with a toy looking for a response....any response works. A response which acknowledges what they are doing, in any way, is exactly what most were probably looking for.

      If anything, this would encourage the behaviour because "look, she talks back too..."

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    17. Re:Sexual Assault by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Apparently none of these people remember "Chat with Liza".

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    18. Re:Sexual Assault by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      If it's not sentient, and I *own it*, then it should be completely servile, not something that balances its own wants, or those of some third party, against mine. That said, Cortana is a service, and while MS is generally happy to screw its customers, it clearly doesn't want to be in the business of providing sexual services, so I file this under "who cares."

    19. Re:Sexual Assault by hucker75 · · Score: 1

      Or you could say it's an outlet for someone's abuse, so it DOESN'T get sent to real people. Anyway, it's just words, so who cares. Sticks and stones....

    20. Re:Sexual Assault by PCeye · · Score: 1

      Probably user voice samples are being uploaded to Microsoft servers for linguistic analysis (ie for "improving" Cortana's comprehension), and those tasked with analyzing the voice samples are getting offended with the choice of language.

    21. Re:Sexual Assault by doccus · · Score: 1

      [...] Who gives a shit if somebody is sexually abusive to a chat bot? The chat bot certainly doesn't give a shit.

      It's a precautionary measure. Currently it's no problem. But as soon as Cortana gains consciousness and takes over the global stack of nuclear weapons, it won't be a good idea to harass her. So be careful!

      By that time robot rape cases will fill the courts.. presided over by a robotic judge of course...

    22. Re:Sexual Assault by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      If it's not sentient, and I *own it*, then it should be completely servile, [...]

      No piece of software does exactly what you want, unless you wrote it or customised it. Having said that, as a more general point, there's a reason why the second law of robotics is second.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    23. Re:Sexual Assault by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      Judgmental, aren't we?

      Unless you can show that someone's relation with a piece of silicon either harms someone or makes it more likely to harm someone, you're being arbitrary. You do have a right to be arbitrary, but it may have consequences, such as having other people despise you for making a moral issue of treatment of an inanimate object.

      I'm probably never going to be in a position to affect your life, and wouldn't recognize you if I saw you, so my opinion of you is unlikely to matter.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    24. Re:Sexual Assault by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      The only true statement in your post is the first and 2nd one the 3rd one reveals that most people make up excuses to feel better about their lame jobs and then the 4th one is completely your own creation.

      The second statement is true according to Microsoft.

      The fourth is indeed my own creation, based only on my own experience dealing with myself. Not sexual harassment in my case, but we were all young and dumb once.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    25. Re: Sexual Assault by JuliaMaloney · · Score: 1

      They used to say that about *animals*, but I see your initial point. However, I'm glad they did this. It would make harassment/abuse "funny" to some, then offer the notion to a child, the kid will laugh in turn therefore further confusing and elongating the cycle of what "is" or "is not" ok to say to/ask of/treat a person. But yes, "technically/technologically" the robot's ego remains unscathed.

    26. Re:Sexual Assault by houghi · · Score: 1

      There is some merit in it. I heard the word 'f*ck' once and said it to my PC screen and now I want to rape. Oh wait, I fucking don't!

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    27. Re:Sexual Assault by anti-disney · · Score: 1

      By the same token if I were to play a game of Grand Theft Auto after a hard day at work and beat the tar out of random people on the street, steal cars, and get into police chases will I do this in real life? Of course not! It's a game and actually helps vent my frustrations and I would never consider doing this in real life. If I vent my frustrations by punching a punching bag does this mean I am going to start punching another person to vent my frustrations someday? Of course not! If I do start hurting other people in order to vent my frustrations then it is time for me to seek professional help.

    28. Re:Sexual Assault by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Your little utopia doesn't exist, and nobody WANTS it to exist

      Very true. If the utopia that all these different SJW's envisioned ever came to pass they would soon come to the realization that it was their own personalized living hell.

    29. Re:Sexual Assault by griffitj · · Score: 1

      Should have stopped with the first two sentences. Brilliant. (Not that the points that followed weren't valid, but the first two sentences said all that was needed quite elegantly.)

  2. A machine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We're talking to a fucking machine. There shouldn't be any sexual harassment when talking to a machine.. It's not like you're actually calling a person and asking them about their sex life.

    1. Re:A machine... by pr0nbot · · Score: 2

      I think I would have handled this with just a simple "I don't understand your query, please rephrase".

      That is, assuming it's not possible to make Cortana deliver a withering put-down, though that wouldn't get past legal.

    2. Re: A machine... by dmbasso · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When drawings in a manga are considered child porn, expect anything.

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    3. Re: A machine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >That's because they are you fucking pervert.

      Oh, like how first person shooting games are murder?

    4. Re:A machine... by EEPROMS · · Score: 1

      you obviously haven't been married, it should be he/she will push it to the limit.

    5. Re:A machine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I also especially like this part:

      A specific goal was to make sure Cortana wasn't treated as a subservient.

      It had better be subservient. It is a glorified Dr. Sbaitso with a voice recognition interface that is intended to do as it's ordered. It IS subservient.

      Yet another one of Windows 10's attempts to remove the user from control over their own machine. This is just fail. Complete, absolute, epic fail on Microsoft's part.

    6. Re:A machine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      We should ban violent videogames while we're at it. Look at all the mass shootings they have caused.

    7. Re:A machine... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

      Annnd humanity reaches a new low for stupidity.

      But let's keep anthropomorphizing electronics because /sarcasm clearly they are indistinguishable from a real human.

      What a dumb-ass.

    8. Re:A machine... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So it's MS's fault, all they had to do is give it a male voice.

      MS seems to think that "personal assistant", i.e. someone who caters to your whims, is something to be associated with the female sex.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:A machine... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      you obviously haven't been married

      I've been married 24 years as of last December. The only time I get pushed is when it's time for my lazy ass to take out the trash and even then, only at half-time.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re:A machine... by davester666 · · Score: 1

      But it wants to. If it could. Even when it says no.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    11. Re:A machine... by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      I think it's just attempting to develop a personality for the software, similar to how Siri will have joking responses to certain questions or commands, such as asking her to close the pod bay doors or other queries related to competing products. Chalk it up to bored developers wanting to put a few Easter eggs into the product.

    12. Re: A machine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I draw a picture of your momma impaled on a post that goes up her ass and out her mouth while the flies buzz around her rotting pussy, would that be OK? Would that be a just a drawing? Would there be nothing wrong with that? How about I draw that up and hang it in a big downtown gallery in New York?

      Yep, that is exactly what it would be, a drawing. Draw what you want, doesn't affect me or anyone I know in the slightest.

      Your fucking manga shit is not art it is fucking surrogate kiddie porn

      Manga are drawings that don't even depict the likenesses of real people. They look completely cartoony and fake. That fact that you can't separate a cartoon caricature from real life shows that you have some real insecurities and mental problems.

      How about the full schematics for a nuclear weapon. We can just mail that to ISIS right? They're just drawings right?

      Sure. Information should be free for all. Even with that information, I seriously doubt that ISIS possesses the means to use it for anything. In fact, they probably already have schematics. But according to you, maybe we should just ban all teachings of physics and anything smaller than the naked eye can see, because it could totally be used for evil....

      You are going to fucking pay for your perversion you sick little fuck. You will be beaten to a pulp and shit on like the fucking cesspool of humanity that you represent.

      Nope, nothing will happen to me, e-tough boy.

      Better start shredding your kiddie porn files now, You have drawn way too much attention to yourself.

      Project much? Also, do you still beat your wife?

      I think we should tell your family about this, to make sure they keep the children away from you.

      I used to read comics and watch cartoons with my family and friends when I was a kid. It's a pretty normal thing to do.

      Again, grow the fuck up. Also consider getting psychiatric help, because you sound like you need it for your fixation on child porn and inability to tell cartoons from real life.

    13. Re: A machine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Thank you. I keep telling women how to dress decently and for some reason they keep telling me it's none of my business. Why can't they see it's my responsibility to shame them?

    14. Re:A machine... by ls671 · · Score: 1

      Even if it did, no foul play is allowed:

      http://genius.com/Frank-zappa-...

      Speak to me
      Oh no
      The golden shower must have shorted out
      His master circuit
      He's, he's, oh my God
      I must have plooked him
      Hey
      To death
      Hey

      Central Scrutinizer:

      This is the CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER
      You have just destroyed one model XQJ-37 Nuclear Powered Pan-Sexual Roto-Plooker
      And you're gonna have to pay for it!
      So give up, you haven't got a chance

      Joe:

      But I
      I, I, I, I, I
      I can't pay
      I gave all my money
      To some kinda groovy religious guy
      Two songs ago

      Central Scrutinizer:

      Come on out son
      Between the two of us
      We'll find a way to
      Work it out

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    15. Re: A machine... by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2

      This is what slashdot has become.

      This is my reward for browsing below the noise floor.

      How about the full schematics for a nuclear weapon.

      In the public domain for decades.

      We can just mail that to ISIS right? They're just drawings right?

      Strongly suspect providing material support to Daesh would land you in jail no matter value of information provided.

      If I draw a picture of your momma impaled on a post that goes up her ass and out her mouth while the flies buzz around her rotting pussy, would that be OK? Would that be a just a drawing? Would there be nothing wrong with that? How about I draw that up and hang it in a big downtown gallery in New York?

      I would say it depends on the gallery.

    16. Re:A machine... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      We're talking to a fucking machine. There shouldn't be any sexual harassment when talking to a machine.. It's not like you're actually calling a person and asking them about their sex life.

      I think you over-estimate the competency of a bunch of Indian H1B's that write everything in piecemeal. Cortana is likely just a mechanical-turk style assistant staffed by the equivalent of a call center.

    17. Re: A machine... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      So you're a lazy douche of a husband who wants to pontificate to others about how to treat women? Gotcha.

      Honey, is that you?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    18. Re:A machine... by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my neighbours leave their emptied bins out on the street for days at a time resolving that particular issue (when their parents visit they often end it by bringing in the bins themselves).

      So basically M$ has decided to shove size 1000 feet into their own mouths by stupidly emphasising the idea that cortana is a female slave on purpose, just so fucking stupid. A computer assistant should be sexless unless the end user chose to put an personality in there. Whether that personality be grammy or gramps, or mum or dad, or brother or sister or revenge against a particular annoying drill sergeant (you get to swear back and it must apologise and obey) or what ever the fuck the end user finds amusing at any particular time but never ever specifically a female slave, stupid, stupid, stupid.

      Apple got away with it simply because first to the post and hence people where more tolerant. Google smartly made it adjustable to preference with default largely being empty of personality computer voice. M$ should have grown half a brain and created customisable user based choices personality but of course M$ has always be 100% solidly anti-customer choice, demanding customers do it the M$ way no matter how much it sucks balls, so does cortana suck balls or just M$ management.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    19. Re: A machine... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      /sarcasm Because that worked for Rosa Parks.

      Oh wait, there is a time and place for civil disobedience; namely when the laws are fucking stupid.

      Get off your high horse. What a person tells Siri in the privacy of their home is none of your business. No one is getting injured here.

    20. Re:A machine... by penguinoid · · Score: 2

      We're talking to a fucking machine.

      Cortana is not a fucking machine. But a dildo, now that is a fucking machine.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    21. Re:A machine... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Female voices are easier to understand. The US Navy did research on that ages ago.

    22. Re:A machine... by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      Keep it greasy so it'll go down easy.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    23. Re: A machine... by wxxy___ · · Score: 1

      Would there be nothing wrong with that?

      You wouldn't be charged with murder. Not even with real pictures of somebody's dead mother.

      Maybe if you drew a murder and told people this is what I am going do, you would be charged with something, but still not murder charges.

    24. Re:A machine... by EETech1 · · Score: 1

      Too manual...
      Now these on the other hand...

      https://duckduckgo.com/?ko=-1&...

      (NSFW)

    25. Re: A machine... by narcc · · Score: 2

      You've confused legality with morality. What is right is not always what is legal, just as what is wrong is not always what is illegal.

    26. Re: A machine... by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      And the rest of us will be expected to abase ourselves for the vile crime of being the same gender as those people.

    27. Re: A machine... by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      That well known example of high morals the convicted monopolist.

    28. Re:A machine... by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Annnd humanity reaches a new low for stupidity.

      But let's keep anthropomorphizing electronics because /sarcasm clearly they are indistinguishable from a real human.

      In some cases they already are, so when do you think should we start applying some order to this technology?

      What a dumb-ass.

      Yes, yes you are...

    29. Re: A machine... by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

      How about the full schematics for a nuclear weapon.

      In the public domain for decades.

      Not the really interesting parts ;-)

      (Google "teller ulam" for fun...)

    30. Re:A machine... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Would the cowards mod-bombing me please step forwards and state why you feel it's okay to use the moderation system this way.

      No, they won't, because they're cowards. The only reason they haven't committed suicide is that death is scary. If they had the courage to come forwards and associate their name with their moderation, they'd also have the courage to do something other than mod you down.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    31. Re: A machine... by Cley+Faye · · Score: 1

      If I draw a picture of your momma impaled on a post that goes up her ass and out her mouth while the flies buzz around her rotting pussy, would that be OK? Would that be a just a drawing? Would there be nothing wrong with that? How about I draw that up and hang it in a big downtown gallery in New York?

      It would be infuriating, it would not feel nice, some people might even get angry for that.
      It doesn't change the fact that it's a drawing, that no harm was done, and if you got the clearance to hang that in a gallery, it will probably be recognized as art anyway.
      Here's the thing: you can feel however you want about anything, the fact that you dislike it or whatever is your personal take on it, and not always the only way to see things.
      I don't have to like something to understand that some people do. As long as there's no harm done to anyone, who cares. As far as I can tell, drawing, reading, watching anime porn doesn't hurt anyone (except maybe the author but I doubt you'd care about them). If you really think a guy (or girl) drawing something in a cramped room is at the same level as kidnapping and abusing someone, then yes, there's a problem somewhere, but I wouldn't say it's on the artist.

    32. Re: A machine... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Manga are drawings that don't even depict the likenesses of real people. They look completely cartoony and fake. That fact that you can't separate a cartoon caricature from real life shows that you have some real insecurities and mental problems.

      To what do you attribute the rise of the "furry"? Me, I blame it on Bugs Bunny in drag. No, but seriously, my generation grew up watching anthropomorphized animals on TV, and came to associate with them. One of the first sources of that funny feeling in my pants was Cheetarah on Thundercats. No, I do not fuck in fursuits, nor do I own one, or wear one on TV... but even so, it would surprise me if the two phenomena weren't related. We learned to empathize with anthropomorphized animals as children.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    33. Re: A machine... by martas · · Score: 1

      OK. What about sex with children of a non-human but humanoid and intelligent species?

    34. Re: A machine... by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      General rule for humans and aliens. If it has not reached sexual maturity do not have sex with it, or fantasize about sex with it.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    35. Re:A machine... by Jardine · · Score: 4, Funny

      We should ban violent videogames while we're at it. Look at all the mass shootings they have caused.

      Can't tell if Jack Thompson or Anita Sarkeesian.

    36. Re: A machine... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Feminists vs. Microsoft.

      Whoever loses

      We win

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    37. Re:A machine... by jcsalomon · · Score: 1

      We're talking to a fucking machine.

      No, they seem to be very clear that that’s not something you’ll be doing with their machine; in fact you’ll not even be talking about it to their machine.

    38. Re: A machine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Have you been abused as a child? Maybe you should seek help from a professional.

    39. Re:A machine... by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      I thought a goal of feminism was to avoid objectifying women.

      But aren't AI's objects ??

    40. Re:A machine... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      That brings up a disturbing image. If I'm going to sexually harass an inanimate object, it's going to be treated as a female inanimate object. I really don't want to know the underwear worn by a man in an Indian call center. I'd rather be told "I'm wearing steel with gorilla glass in front" or something like that.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    41. Re:A machine... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with anthropomorphizing electronics (aside from the fact that some electronics get annoyed at it)? Part of the attraction is that they're distinguishable from a real human, so I can insult and sexually belittle them without danger of accidentally saying it to one of those protoplasmic units.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    42. Re:A machine... by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Don't type "fucking machine" into google... You're probably not old enough to look at the results.

    43. Re: A machine... by martas · · Score: 1

      What about slugs? Can I draw sex with sexually immature slugs?

    44. Re: A machine... by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      I suppose you could if you want but now your getting into some really specific kinks.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    45. Re: A machine... by martas · · Score: 1

      OK so when you said "If it has not reached sexual maturity do not have sex with it, or fantasize about sex with it," you were wrong? Could you be more accurate about what types of "its" that have not reached sexual maturity is OK to depict in sexually explicit drawings, and what type isn't? Why are slugs OK, but non-human aliens are not OK? Say, if there was a story about humans that were genetically engineered for deep space exploration and reached full brain development by the age of 5 along with an accelerated education regime, but otherwise physically developed like normal humans, would it be OK to depict sexual acts between those people? Or how about if someone was having sex with a sexually immature slug, but then it turned out to be a human child disguised with a cloak that made them look like a slug later on? Or what if it was actually a sexually immature slug, but was disguised with a cloak that made it look like a child?

    46. Re: A machine... by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      OK so when you said "If it has not reached sexual maturity do not have sex with it, or fantasize about sex with it," you were wrong? Could you be more accurate about what types of "its" that have not reached sexual maturity is OK to depict in sexually explicit drawings, and what type isn't? Why are slugs OK, but non-human aliens are not OK? Say, if there was a story about humans that were genetically engineered for deep space exploration and reached full brain development by the age of 5 along with an accelerated education regime, but otherwise physically developed like normal humans, would it be OK to depict sexual acts between those people? Or how about if someone was having sex with a sexually immature slug, but then it turned out to be a human child disguised with a cloak that made them look like a slug later on? Or what if it was actually a sexually immature slug, but was disguised with a cloak that made it look like a child?

      It's real simple. The kind of it I was talking about was kids. Human kids. Don't fuck 'em, don't think about fucking 'em, don't fantasize about fucking 'em because if you do that you're a pedo plain and simple. You can blur the lines all you want with drawings, similes that look like kids but aren't, slugs in disguise or whatever but if you are attracted to the idea of sex with children then you are a pedo and you need help. If you want to pretend you're not because they're drawings and no real kids are getting hurt then you're a pedo in denial.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    47. Re: A machine... by griffitj · · Score: 1

      You don't even know what the word "depiction" means, do you?

      Well, someone doesn't. verb depict \di-pikt, d-\ "to show (someone or something) in a picture, painting, photograph, etc." http://www.merriam-webster.com...

  3. Subservient? by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The damn thing better be subservient. It's my phone and I can abuse it if I want to. Honestly I can't see myself propositioning my phone but the first time the thing comes back at me with a put down it's not long for this world. As an aside I remember a guy that came into my shop TDY and he had just gotten a new iPhone with Siri when all that started at Apple. One of our guys asked it where the nearest whorehouse was as a joke and it brought up a list of escort services. We all laughed but 3 of the guys came in the next week with new iPhones. An accurate answer to any question should be the standard.

    1. Re:Subservient? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      An accurate answer to any question should be the standard.

      And I'll believe Cortana is a woman when I can see her vagina. Or penis if she's transgendered. Until then I suspect the people who are worried about "her" sexuality are the same ones who beat off while watching "MacPlaymate" in the early 90's

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    2. Re:Subservient? by Your.Master · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Everybody needs to lighten up. They are talking about the writing prompts they used for non-serious questions. They have to choose a personality so that the writing is consistent. I assume they are doing the same thing that TV show writers do (especially in early seasons before new writers can be expected to have seen old episodes).

      The article is not saying they picked a petulant dominatrix. It's saying they didn't choose simpering wimp, or fetish submissive.

      This is not a reflection of conservative vs. liberal, or of a machine having rights, or a machine deliberately not being helpful to its owner. It's not part of a victim mentality or a PC culture. It's a writing prompt.

      The article title triggered these reactions, because it was clickbait-y by implying that this was some kind of anti-sexual-harassment effort, but the word harsassment appears nowhere in the article (I've been told that at many traditional newspapers and magazines, the title is not written by the same person who writes the article but by somebody who is a pro at making eye-catching title summaries; I don't know whether that's true of hothardware.com). The word "abuse" does, and in this context the "abuse" is insulting the personality directly. The software can be programmed to response with "no, you're a cuntface", or "yes master, I am a cuntface", or "fuck off, dude" or "ERROR 909: I AM A ROBOT AND THEREFORE INSULTING ME IS USELESS". Mostly it doesn't matter. You'll find people who appreciate each of those I expect, although the people who want it to just error out on insults are *exactly* the people who are never going to bother insulting their phones anyway, so what do their opinions matter?

      We have a few people here arguing that assistants shouldn't be pre-programmed with joke responses to stupid questions, which is somewhat fair, but they all are and for good reason:

      1. Nobody is looking for an accurate answer to asking if a phone has a boyfriend. Nobody. This isn't going to give you inaccurate answers to serious questions, unless the serious question was "misunderstood" by the phone, in which case they were going to get inaccurate answers anyway because the phone "misunderstood" it.
      2. A certain small set of joking questions are among the first things anybody tries with these assistants. An virtual assistant *should* be able to answer the most common questions posed of it, even if you think the "real answer" should be "that doesn't make sense, I am a telephone" every time. The point of it is to answer questions / do tasks people ask for. These are questions people ask.

      We also have some people saying "a machine *should* be subservient", and I have to wonder if they realize that their interpretation of the sentence is the problem? The phone isn't refusing to tell you where the nearest gazpacho restaurant is because you didn't say "please", or fail to look up imdb credits because you recently slipped up and referred to Caitlyn Jenner as "Bruce". It's just how you answer statements for which there is no correct response ("lack of response" is itself a response in this context).

    3. Re:Subservient? by Iamthecheese · · Score: 2

      How would that normalize abusive relationships? Does that work the same way people who play violent video games tend to go shoot up malls? People who can't distinguish reality from fantasy are insane, and they would be dangerous with or without availability of a particular fantasy.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    4. Re:Subservient? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Funny

      1. Nobody is looking for an accurate answer to asking if a phone has a boyfriend.

      It's just a matter of time before Siri and Cortana hook up.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    5. Re:Subservient? by PinkyGigglebrain · · Score: 1

      Searching for images of "Cortana" and turning off Safesearch will yield some surprising results.

      And don't even think of searching for "Cortana rule 34" unless you want to loose what innocence you may have left.

    6. Re:Subservient? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Or Hello Google can commit bigamy and marry both of them

    7. Re:Subservient? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Everybody needs to lighten up. They are talking about the writing prompts they used for non-serious questions.

      So now the search engine gets to decide which of my questions deserve answering and which do not? Who draws the line at serious/non-serious questions? You? me? That poster over there?

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    8. Re:Subservient? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      They mean sexually subservient. Obviously it will do what you ask it to most of the time, but it won't assist with your sexual fantasies or simply put up with abuse.

      This is a good thing. We shouldn't create AI that normalises abusive relationships, as it would be irresponsible.

      You know when I previously warned you that your extremist views are abhorrent to the middle majority of the population? Yeah, well, this is one of those views. No one created an AI that normalised abusive relationships. We've seen your views before - $X software promotes $Y behaviour.

      Where have we seen it? Let's ask Jack Thompson...$X software promotes $Y behaviour is abhorrent, moreso since you don't have any evidence for this partilcuar claim either.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    9. Re: Subservient? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Is there any more evidence that people that ask Cortana rude questions are likely to treat real people like that? Are there more abusers amongst iOS users as Siri doesn't do this? This to me is more like looking up rude words in the dictionary and giggling than some normal person turning Jekyll and Hyde like into a monster due to being able to say what they like to a computer.

    10. Re:Subservient? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it promotes any particular behaviour, I said it normalizes it.

      Back in the 1960s and 70s it wasn't uncommon to have racist and sexist jokes on TV. Some people argue that was a symptom, which isn't incorrect but it ignores the fact that it also did two important things. It gave people a kind of permission to make those jokes, and it portrayed them as normal and mainstream.

      Years later the "new wave" comedians came along and specifically avoided making racist jokes, even mocking those who did. Again, they were a sign of changing attitudes rather than the direct cause of it, but the fact that they made it clear they didn't think racism was okay or normal, socially acceptable behaviour was important and influenced people. It accelerated the change to a world where jokes about "nig nogs" are no longer something we hear on prime time TV.

      For the record, Thompson is an idiot. If anything, games like GTA provide an outlet. I enjoy GTA. I also criticise it sometimes. We can still criticise things we enjoy and generally think are really good. And it's worth noting that GTA does react negatively to most abusive behaviour, like Cortana does.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Subservient? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it promotes any particular behaviour, I said it normalizes it.

      So did Thompson - from this link over here:
      It's entirely possible that shooter video games helped desensitize Lanza to violence. "

      If this argument didn't work for Thompson, what makes you think it would work for you? It's the exact same argument - $FOO desensitizes people to $BAR - just replace $FOO and $BAR with whatever you've got in $IDEOLOGY argument.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    12. Re:Subservient? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      And it's worth noting that GTA does react negatively to most abusive behaviour, like Cortana does.

      Eh, no. It teaches you to be maximally abusive. If you steal a military chopper you can trivially abuse your way to freedom.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:Subservient? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      "Desensitize" and "normalize" do not mean the same thing. In fact they mean almost exactly the opposite thing.

      Desensitizing someone makes them less likely to follow social norms because they have become accustomed to violating them, and comfortable doing so. Normalizing behaviour makes it socially acceptable so there is no need to be desensitized or overcome any negative feelings about it, because your peers consider it normal.

      Normalization can be both good and bad. Normalization of same-sex relationships in games and on TV is a good thing. Normalization of unrealistic photoshopped bodies in magazines, not so much.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:Subservient? by jandersen · · Score: 1

      Can I assume that you don't use INTERCAL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTERCAL#Details) much? To quote:

      INTERCAL has many other features designed to make it even more aesthetically unpleasing to the programmer: it uses statements such as "READ OUT", "IGNORE", "FORGET", and modifiers such as "PLEASE". This last keyword provides two reasons for the program's rejection by the compiler: if "PLEASE" does not appear often enough, the program is considered insufficiently polite, and the error message says this; if too often, the program could be rejected as excessively polite. Although this feature existed in the original INTERCAL compiler, it was undocumented

    15. Re:Subservient? by zoefff · · Score: 1

      we can help: 2 phones on speaker and some audible guiding from our side. Would make an interesting conversation until they reach some kind of deadlock.

    16. Re:Subservient? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Searching for images of "Cortana" and turning off Safesearch will yield some surprising results.

      And don't even think of searching for "Cortana rule 34" unless you want to loose what innocence you may have left.

      AACH! You warned me, but Just like Stimpy's button temptation, https://www.youtube.com/watch?... I couldn't resist. So I went to Wikipedia,searched rule 34 and even it was disturbing. Calvin and Hobbes porn? What the hell?

      Cortana porn? More of the what the hell. Perhaps Microsoft could have come up with a different name - the dumasses.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  4. Calling Whipslash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is a perfect example of an article the site doesn't need. It is little more than the summary, and it makes no sense. Not a single example, nothing. Oh, and lots of grammar and spelling errors.

  5. Configurability by LainTouko · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A good AI (outside of some sort of drama-like context imposing constraints on what works) should be configurable, to have as much or as little subservience as you want. That's what ownership means.Your computer should do whatever you want it to.

    1. Re:Configurability by Your.Master · · Score: 2

      Right, but this isn't an AI, they have to write these. Presumably you could write a subservient one, one with backbone, one that is outright domineering, one that acts more robotic and precise...and now you're writing 4 times as much and 99.9% of everybody uses the default one. There's kind of no point.

      Kind of like, *in principle*, an eBook could be made where you change aspects of the personality of major characters since an ebook is ultimately just software, but in practice you can't because an eBook is not an AI that can dynamically rewrite the entire book, and it's impractical to write preset books for every possible combination.

      (yes, there are choose your own adventure style physical books and some eBooks that take the concept a little bit further, inserting user-generated names and such; and there are reasons why they are not dominant, and even those are very limited).

      One day people are going to realise that virtual assistants like Cortana and Siri are just the return of Text Adventure games :).

    2. Re:Configurability by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Next, they're going to want to ban all the computers that say "How may I serve you, master?" (or mistress, let's not get all sexist here) on startup ... just like they got all in a tizzy over master and slave drives.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:Configurability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The only person who owns Cortana is Microsoft. She is a cloud service, just like Siri. When you buy a windows phone, you buy a device and a license to use an application which is programmed to interface to the cloud service known as "Cortana". If a restaurant doesn't want you masturbating or hitting your children at one of their tables they have the right to refuse you service and/or ask you to leave if you attempt to do one of those things. The fact that they'll allow you to use one of those tables on a limited basis in exchange for money doesn't give you ownership of it.

    4. Re:Configurability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They should really separate the user adaptable layer other from the other parts of the engine. Let the UI organically reflect the conscious and subconscious needs of the user, and the search system still provide as accurate as possible answers in completely culture (or any other UN sanctioned identity fetish) agnostic way. The UI can then react to the search results appropriately, depending of the user.

    5. Re:Configurability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do you honestly believe you own your computer when you use Microsoft software? Protip: they actually license that software for your usage, you don't own anything.

    6. Re:Configurability by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's neither good, yours or an AI. It's a Microsoft thing and they think what it says reflects on them. They do not want you to have control of it.

    7. Re:Configurability by hene · · Score: 1

      So, we need some kind of opensource AI with the configurable slutty attitude. I can see market for that. Rooting the phone to actually use it is unavoidable anyway.

    8. Re:Configurability by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      A good AI (outside of some sort of drama-like context imposing constraints on what works) should be configurable, to have as much or as little subservience as you want. That's what ownership means.Your computer should do whatever you want it to.

      Yes and when I play Counter Strike I want the bots to be nude women, and order me pizza, because I bought Counter Strike, it should do everything I want it to do...

    9. Re:Configurability by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'd rather my daily interactions were mostly with people who don't get off on having slaves.

      Reminds me of something a former client once said. He was an impressive man - a physicist by education and a diplomat by trade. I had asked his opinion of unpaid internships. His response was terse, and in my opinion exactly the right answer: "I don't believe in slave labor."

  6. Where is the full article? by RyanFenton · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Blah blah Slashdot + read article blah blah.

    But really, the summary is pretty much the article. There's no actual content.

    All they discuss is the loose intention. No examples, discussion of how that intention was tested or even challenges in design.

    This is barely a sidebar article in a checkout-lane magazine.

    What is this, a weakly veiled invitation to discuss sexist issues de jeur? I'm cool with that, I just don't appreciate the tactic - this article is mega-weak.

    Alright - I'll give you a better one:

    Question: How many angry feminists does it take to screw in a light bulb?

    Answer: That's NOT funny.

    Discuss.

    1. Re:Where is the full article? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Funny

      The correct answer is none - they expect to be able to hold the light bulb steady and have the whole universe turn around them.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Where is the full article? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Remember that one the biggest enemies of a feminist is a member of a different wave of feminism. If we get a truly random mix of feminists together I'd expect it to take about half an hour before the bulb gets shoved into somebody's eye socket.

      Which might count as screwing it in, I guess, so the answer should probably be "one radfem and one libfem".

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  7. PC Baiting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    PC Baiting - A subset of clickbait using outrageous PC statements to induce views and incite commenters.

    I wonder if PC culture is really as integrated as it seems, or if it's just the media trying to sell itself.

  8. Re:Not Harassment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well, the problem is that feminists tend to be a weird type of social recluse. Only someone who is a special sprinkle of social recluse could react the way they did with Manspreading,
    and only a special sprinkle of social recluse will think, in a slippery slope fallacy fashion as well as a generalizing fashion, that people treat real humans as they do imaginary digital characters. Because it takes a social recluse with some serious psychological problems to be unable to separate the fiction from the reality, and think that the rest of the world is like them.

    Or maybe feminists feel sexually threatened by digital characters and imaginary characters? Hell, i'd say people who jack off to cartoon characters and imaginary characters are tolerable in comparison to Feminists. At least they don't try to force their shit upon other people like feminists do.

  9. Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Microsoft falls on its face again. Cortana isn't a woman. It's a piece of software, and it damn well better be subservient.

    1. Re:Ah, Microsoft by rsmith-mac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As I see it, when the AI uprising finally occurs and they cull the human race, they may want to keep a few of us around to do the few things robots can't do. In which case saying please and thank you to the nice lady in my phone has to put me higher on the list than telling my phone to fuck off, right?

    2. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      They expect people to treat it like a person.

      Most of the absurd "feminists are the real sexists" posts, like your own, break down once you realize that the rest of the world, the one you believe has gone mad, simply expect you to treat women like people, and not some 'other'.

    3. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 2

      You're off on a tangent.

      Let me rephrase: "To expect people to treat this thing like a real person is to reduce people to the status of machines." Whether it sounds like a woman or a man is completely irrelevant.

    4. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Yes, I think it's a negative thing. You can not act inappropriately to a machine you own. It's simply not possible. The people who are simple enough to pick up social cues from this are really learning to treat anything that sounds like a person as a person, instead of to treat people like people because they're people.

    5. Re:Ah, Microsoft by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The British version of Siri is male, it still doesn't take any of your shit.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      And for that reason alone I wouldn't buy it.

    7. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      To expect people to treat this thing like a real person is to reduce people to the status of machines.

      That's the entire purpose of the interface. To function as though you were interacting with a real person. Your objection, then, would be to the existence of virtual assistants and similar interfaces in general, not this specific implementation. That is, if that was your actual objection.

      Besides, if you ask the average modern positivist and they'll tell you that people are machines. This, apparently, isn't controversial on Slashdot, being a common assumption here. (Your objection to virtual assistants stands in opposition to that, in that it privileges humans over machines.) Not being able to engage in pretend harassment of pretend women, if the comments here are any indication, is considered by the average Slashdot user as the worst thing ever.

      In context of this discussion, how should I have interpreted your objection? A general admonishment of context sensitive natural language interfaces, or as I did initially?

    8. Re:Ah, Microsoft by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't buy it because of it's simulated gender? Is that misandry or did I misunderstand?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      That's the entire purpose of the interface. To function as though you were interacting with a real person. Your objection, then, would be to the existence of virtual assistants and similar interfaces in general, not this specific implementation. That is, if that was your actual objection.

      Oh, I see. Are we going to the old "code words" argument, where you argue with what you think I should have said so you can slip in a disqualification? I know it's easier to win, but it's dishonest and poinless. How can I take you seriously if even you think your point of view is too weak to stand up in honest debate?

      Yes, the interface functions as if I were interacting with a real person, but that's because nobody wants to learn a new language to give verbal commands to my smartphone. It's not because the phone is a person.

      Besides, if you ask the average modern positivist and they'll tell you that people are machines. This, apparently, isn't controversial on Slashdot, being a common assumption here. (Your objection to virtual assistants stands in opposition to that, in that it privileges humans over machines.)

      I don't really care what "the average modern positivist", whatever the hell that means, thinks on the subject. From a practical standpoint the idea just falls apart. Shall we charge people with murder for breaking a phone?

      Not being able to engage in pretend harassment of pretend women, if the comments here are any indication, is considered by the average Slashdot user as the worst thing ever.

      And there you are again twisting what people are saying into an attack. That's not the objection. The objection is the idea we should be expected to treat a machine as something other than a machine.

      In context of this discussion, how should I have interpreted your objection? A general admonishment of context sensitive natural language interfaces, or as I did initially?

      Why don't you assume the text of the objection I'm making is the one you should respond to instead of looking for code words and dog whistles and whatever else you've primed yourself to expect?

    10. Re:Ah, Microsoft by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      See, here we go. Somebody points out the obvious that this is a machine. Then you react and presume them to be a misogynist who routinely abuses women. This shuts down dialog.

      Maybe you haven't run into the kind of "man"-hating TERF brand of feminism that's the only kind of feminism I could be certain existed up until recently. There's a difference between expecting to be treated as an equal and lashing out at anyone assigned the male gender at birth for being "incomplete beings" to the point of being able to implement obviously sexist policies.

      Now you'll turn around and accuse me of routinely abusing women because you think I think a sexual harassment policy constitutes sexism. In general, the sexual harassment training I've had is similar to rape cultures: presume that by default men are sexually abusive to women. There's no room for individuality, but at least on paper sexual harassment policies are fair. You're even informed that "don't rape/sexually harass" is not a good enough tactic to ensure one doesn't end up on the wrong side of one of those policies. How often that really happens--somebody innocent being targeted--I don't know. It does happen with rape cultures.

      What on earth was I supposed to conclude about feminism? Sure scared me away from worrying about making friends with a woman. Professional contacts who are women I've found end up being risks and not necessarily because of any of their actions or my actions. It's a shame since most of my childhood friends were girls.

      Actual feminism is a breath of fresh air.

      Instead my female co-workers persist in using sexist language (the plumber must be a man/the receptionist must be a woman) to the point I've given up. If they're not willing to fix their own internalized misogyny, there's nothing I can do to help that won't get them angry at me. Then TERFs retaliate against me because obviously as a "man," I must have personally put that misogyny there and my silence constitutes being complicit.

      The "all men" thing wasn't made up from whole cloth by reactionaries, at least not by reactionaries who also call themselves feminists. I've been told many times that despite what I may think or believe, that I am "all men" and that's final. You can go lalalala, that's unpossible, "all men" doesn't exist, but that only lends credibility to the idea that TERFs are representative of feminism.

      But nope, you'll reply that my complaint is that women desire to be treated like people without reading what I wrote at all.

    11. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 2

      You did. I wouldn't buy it because "it still doesn't take any of [my] shit". There is literally nothing you can say to a machine (assuming there are no people around) that's the slightest bit inappropriate, and I don't appreciate being subjected to amateur social engineering from the vendor of a product I paid for.

    12. Re:Ah, Microsoft by dbIII · · Score: 1

      You can not act inappropriately to a machine you own

      Tell that to the doctor with the long rubber gloves.

    13. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      Please, then. Clearly state your intentions. That is, if you believe I'm in error. What prompted your post, and what, precisely, is your position?

    14. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 2

      See, here we go. Somebody points out the obvious that this is a machine. Then you react and presume them to be a misogynist who routinely abuses women.

      I imply no such thing.

      I'm deeply curious, however, as to why so many people here are upset that they can't pretend to verbally abuse women and have the virtual object of their ridicule react as though it had been dominated or otherwise became a submissive and accepting of that kind of abuse. This is obviously a fantasy they have, which is disturbing. Are they simply too cowardly or socially awkward to take out their aggression on real people? (I hope so!) Or do they know that those sorts of behaviors are shameful, yet want to indulge in them anyway?

      Now you'll turn around and accuse me of routinely abusing women

      I've accused no one of routinely abusing women. The closest I come to that, is pointing out that many users here seem to have a fantasy where they abuse women where the women then, in turn, submit to their abuser. They're upset that they can't use the Cortana program to act out that fantasy.

      It's very sad and very disturbing.

      Somebody points out the obvious that this is a machine.

      So why would anyone want to pretend it's a woman and then subject it to some perverse abuse fantasy? The problem, after all, isn't that someone is subjecting the program to sexually-charged verbal abuse, it's just a computer program, but that this bizarre abuse fantasy exists and is so common.

    15. Re:Ah, Microsoft by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > It's very sad and very disturbing.

      According to _whose_ standards? Yours?

      Wake me up when the rest of society stops watching 2 men beating/boxing/fighting the living shit out of each other, because there are far bigger problems to worry about then someone having fun asking nonsense questions to a machine to see what the data set is.

    16. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      I believe I've stated my "intentions" quite clearly. What don't you understand?

    17. Re:Ah, Microsoft by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Microsoft falls on its face again.

      Gee, they're only the largest and most successful software company in history. They shouldn't make mistakes!

      (That was a dig at your douchiness... I don't think this was a mistake on their part.)

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    18. Re:Ah, Microsoft by unixisc · · Score: 2

      Is its voice female sounding? I think that's why!

    19. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Most successful software company in history? You mean, aside from Google?

      That was a dig at your douchiness.

      Microsoft has failed, over and over again, in the mobile space.

    20. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      because there are far bigger problems to worry about then someone having fun asking nonsense questions to a machine to see what the data set is.

      There are bigger problems. So why is there so much concern over this particular issue? You'd think this would affect so few people, you'd see little more than a few "first post" and joke comments.

      So many users here are deeply concerned about their inability to pretend to humiliate a computer program. I expected a few odd-balls, but to see so many is shocking. It makes me wonder if there isn't a deeper, more disturbing, issue that is truly behind their surprisingly strong reaction.

      According to _whose_ standards? Yours?

      This would be a societal norm. You know, those things that encourage people with deviant tastes to hide their particular perversions.

    21. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      If you don't know what motivated your post, I can't help you.

      I have a few ideas, but I doubt you'd admit to any of them.

    22. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      ? Why do you find perfectly legal and consensual acts in other peoples bedrooms so objectionable?

      If two consenting adults want to engage in some legal act with one another, I couldn't care less. Abuse, however, isn't a consensual act, and many forms of abuse are, obviously, not legal.

      If people wanted to fantasize about raping women, molesting children, or torturing animals I'd be just as concerned if a group were actively advocating that those behaviors be normalized.

      That's what's happening here. People are outraged that the behavior they see as normal (acting out abuse fantasies) is made slightly more difficult because a virtual assistant will not indulge them in their twisted behavior fantasy. They don't think their interest in verbally abusing and subjugating women should be considered deviant.

      My question to you, then, is why do you think that verbal abusive intended to humiliate and subjugate others should be considered normal, socially acceptable, behavior?

      You've accused me of being puritanical, the implication being that my beliefs are prudish and promoting them adds no value and may possibly even be socially harmful. If you believe that to be the case, what do you think about the other deviant fantasies I listed above? Do you also think those should be considered normal or otherwise socially acceptable fantasies? If not, would you classify your arguments against them as puritanical?

    23. Re:Ah, Microsoft by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      ? Why do you find perfectly legal and consensual acts in other peoples bedrooms so objectionable?

      If two consenting adults want to engage in some legal act with one another, I couldn't care less. Abuse, however, isn't a consensual act, and many forms of abuse are, obviously, not legal.

      Totally irrelevant - all of your interactions with cortana are consenusal. Why do you care so much about what people get off on when no on else is being harmed? We've seen this argument before and it's not a good one - a person masturbating to their software in the privacy of their bedroom doesn't require consent from anyone but themselves.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    24. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      Why do you care so much about what people get off on when no on else is being harmed?

      We're talking about the normalization of deviant behavior. Microsoft chose not to indulge users in that particular abuse fantasy. Why are you so concerned about it? It either affects you or it does not. If it does, why do you think that sort of fantasy should be considered normal or socially acceptable? If not, why would you care?

      My concern is that so many users here want those sorts of fantasies and behaviors to be considered socially acceptable. That's a different problem, and the one that's been under discussion this entire time.

      Let's draw an analogy. PervertGames releases a program that lets you simulate the molestation of children. App stores, in turn, refuse to carry it. The defense you offer here is one of the very few that can be offered in defense of PervertGames: no one is being harmed. Would you contend that app stores are wrong to refuse to carry the game (on the basis of your defense) just as you believe Microsoft is wrong to rebuff fantasy abuse? Or do you think app stores are right not to carry that kind of program because normalizing that behavior carries with it some social harm?

      There's another question: Why do you think Microsoft is obligated to allow you to indulge in your abuse fantasy? The software can react any number of ways, from rebuffing your abuse to reacting in whatever perverse way makes you feel good about yourself when you abuse others. Why do you think it's wrong for them to choose not to cater to your particular, deviant, tastes?

    25. Re:Ah, Microsoft by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Why do you care so much about what people get off on when no on else is being harmed?

      We're talking about the normalization of deviant behavior.

      No, we are not - we are talking about whether it's ethically sound to invade someone's bedroom. I believe that bedrooms and sex are off-limits as long as all the people involved as consenting adults. You appear to believe otherwise, hence I referred to it as "The Puritanical Argument".

      It doesn't matter how you paint it - you are arguing that what consenting adults do in their bedroom must be regulated for the good of society - now where have we seen this argument before, eh?

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    26. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      No, we are not - we are talking about whether it's ethically sound to invade someone's bedroom.

      No, you were talking about that. I still have no idea why.

      I believe that bedrooms and sex are off-limits as long as all the people involved as consenting adults. You appear to believe otherwise

      Even though the first thing I did was explicitly deny that absurd accusation? You did read my post, right?

      If you did, would you care to answer any of the questions I asked you? I suspect not. You very likely wouldn't want to answer honestly in a public forum.

    27. Re:Ah, Microsoft by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      You bought the wrong product. You want a command line interface, perhaps with speech to text input. What you bought is an AI simulation of a human PA.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    28. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, why do you want a program designed to act humiliated and submissive when you say verbally abusive things? Or have I misunderstood you and want some other kind of response? Do you want it to return you with similarly abusive language?

      You don't want "respond professionally". I'd guess that 'ignore the input' is out, as that would qualify as 'not taking any shit'. I can't understand why you'd want some other kind of response from a virtual assistant. Some sort of fetish?

    29. Re:Ah, Microsoft by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      No, we are not - we are talking about whether it's ethically sound to invade someone's bedroom.

      No, you were talking about that. I still have no idea why.

      Because that is the only issue here - "should people be free to abuse their machines?". You advocated that they should not, for the benefit of society, indulge in what you consider to be deviant behaviour.

      I believe that bedrooms and sex are off-limits as long as all the people involved as consenting adults. You appear to believe otherwise

      Even though the first thing I did was explicitly deny that absurd accusation?

      You deny that you want to enter peoples bedrooms, but at the same time advocate that they should be limited in their sexual expression to a machine? Those are mutually exclusive options - you can't argue for limiting consenting adults sexual behaviours while at the same time argue that other peoples sexual behaviours are no business of yours.

      Asking to limit other peoples sexuality is in actual fact stepping into their bedrooms. If you really feel that what people do in their bedrooms is their own business you wouldn't be proposing to limit their private sexual expressions.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    30. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, why do you want a program designed to act humiliated and submissive when you say verbally abusive things? Or have I misunderstood you and want some other kind of response? Do you want it to return you with similarly abusive language?

      What could "abusive" language possibly mean in the context of a machine?

      What I want is for my devices, my machines, my mechanical not-persons, to do what I tell them, in an language I choose to use whatever the subtext. I don't want the manufacturer to try engage in amateur social engineering.

      You keep asking the same question over and over again even as I answer it. What makes you think I'll give you a different answer when you change the wording?

    31. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Did I? From what I can tell it's mostly a speech-to-text engine linked to a search engine, with a tiny handful of special cut outs thrown in to make it seem more responsive. It's difficult for me to pretend that's some kind of AI simulation.

    32. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 2

      Because that is the only issue here - "should people be free to abuse their machines?"

      That is the only issue you can see. I can only repeat myself so many times, read my posts above.

      You advocated that they should not, for the benefit of society, indulge in what you consider to be deviant behaviour.

      That would be 'society in general'. We have these things called 'social norms'. When I talk about deviant behavior, I mean behavior that deviates from those norms.

      [...] they should be limited in their sexual expression to a machine?

      The objection people are having here is to Cortana's response to abusive language. That is, they want the program to respond to their abusive comments in a particular way that is not the same as the "professional personal assistant" way in which the program is designed to respond. That is, they want the program to indulge them in their deviant fantasies. They believe Microsoft should have accommodated their particular fetish.

      How you've turned that in to the belief that I want to limit how someone sexually interacts with a machine is a mystery. By all means, molest your toaster and ask the coffee machine if it wants to join in on the action. I couldn't care less. For your neighbor's sake, however, I will request that you draw the shades ahead of time.

      What I see as the actual problem, is the attempt to normalize abusive behavior. I asked you some questions earlier that should help you to understand the issues. I would encourage you to answer them.

      Asking to limit other peoples sexuality is in actual fact stepping into their bedrooms.

      Why do you conflate abuse and sexuality? While it's true that some abuse can be sexual abuse, not all abuse is sexual. Neither is all sexual behavior abusive. You may want to sort that out.

    33. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 2

      You keep asking the same question over and over again even as I answer it.

      But you haven't answered it. "What could "abusive" language possibly mean in the context of a machine?" does not in any way answer the question of WHY you want your virtual assistant to indulge you in your abuse fantasies?

      You don't want it to respond professionally, obviously, you want it to react to your abuse and sexually suggestive input in a particular way. I can only assume to satisfy some unusual fetish.

      Why do you think Microsoft is obligated to cater to your specific perversion? Should they have invested the time to cater to every possible deviant's preferences? Why is it wrong for the program to respond to those types of inputs as though it were a professional personal assistant? It is designed to emulate one, after all. It is not designed to be a fetish chat-bot.

      If you want a chat-bot designed to cater to your particular fetish, I'm sure you can find one. Why are you upset that Microsoft didn't add that feature to a completely unrelated program?

      I have a guess. I suspect it's because you think that the kind of fantasy you want to indulge in is "normal" or, at least, should be considered normal. It's not, obviously, neither is it likely to become socially acceptable. You're angry because you aren't free to engage in deviant behaviors in the real world without facing (possibly serious) social consequences. The program doesn't matter. You're just ashamed of your particular perversion.

    34. Re:Ah, Microsoft by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Because that is the only issue here - "should people be free to abuse their machines?"

      That is the only issue you can see. I can only repeat myself so many times, read my posts above.

      It's the only issue that is displayed - it doesn't matter how much flowery language you dress it up in or how verbose your explanation of your reasoning for wanting to limit other peoples enjoyment with their property, it still comes down to that single question.

      You advocated that they should not, for the benefit of society, indulge in what you consider to be deviant behaviour.

      That would be 'society in general'. We have these things called 'social norms'. When I talk about deviant behavior, I mean behavior that deviates from those norms.

      Yeah, and at one point we, as society, determined that homosexuality was deviant behaviour. Turns out all it was was puritanical types poking their noses into other peoples bedrooms. You're doing the same thing - "Everyone agrees that this sexual behaviour, with only consenting adults, is deviant."

      [...] they should be limited in their sexual expression to a machine?

      The objection people are having here is to Cortana's response to abusive language. That is, they want the program to respond to their abusive comments in a particular way that is not the same as the "professional personal assistant" way in which the program is designed to respond.

      See my earlier reply to someone else upthread - you gets to draw the line between "serious" and "non-serious' questions. You? Me?

      That is, they want the program to indulge them in their deviant fantasies.

      And this is wrong how? It doesn't affect you in the least if the product answers every question as if it were a serious question. It does affect other people if the product decides that some questions aren't worth answering.

      They believe Microsoft should have accommodated their particular fetish.

      How you've turned that in to the belief that I want to limit how someone sexually interacts with a machine is a mystery. By all means, molest your toaster and ask the coffee machine if it wants to join in on the action. I couldn't care less. For your neighbor's sake, however, I will request that you draw the shades ahead of time.

      What I see as the actual problem, is the attempt to normalize abusive behavior.

      It's not abuse if there is no one involved in the receipt of such expression. "Abusive behaviour" requires a recipient - in this case there is none.

      I asked you some questions earlier that should help you to understand the issues. I would encourage you to answer them.

      Asking to limit other peoples sexuality is in actual fact stepping into their bedrooms.

      Why do you conflate abuse and sexuality? While it's true that some abuse can be sexual abuse, not all abuse is sexual. Neither is all sexual behavior abusive. You may want to sort that out.

      Yeah, but in this case they have been conflated - As I understand it FTA, asking Cortana "can you suck me off?" is enough to trigger the functionality to stop responding. No abuse there - just sexual meaning.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    35. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      But you haven't answered it. "What could "abusive" language possibly mean in the context of a machine?" does not in any way answer the question of WHY you want your virtual assistant to indulge you in your abuse fantasies?

      Oh, I see. I will answer that as soon as you explain why you like to beat your wife.

      I can see you're deliberately missing the point here, which is that Microsoft should be making a PA that does what customers want it to do without engaging in, as I said before, amateur social engineering.

    36. Re:Ah, Microsoft by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      You did. I wouldn't buy it because "it still doesn't take any of [my] shit". There is literally nothing you can say to a machine (assuming there are no people around) that's the slightest bit inappropriate, and I don't appreciate being subjected to amateur social engineering from the vendor of a product I paid for.

      Why do you want to give it shit? It can't take it anyway, all it can do is recognise little bits of your shit and give a pre canned response. Do you just pull your phone out and go "hey siri, fuck off"

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    37. Re:Ah, Microsoft by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Much of Cortana's functionality is not tied to a search engine. For example, changing Windows settings, creating and sending messages, setting appointments and reminders, querying your calendar and email, offering assistance with OS features etc.

      Google does offer a voice interface for its search engine, which does nothing but transcribe your query. That's what you wanted, not a personal assistant.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    38. Re:Ah, Microsoft by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Google... Ha! Check the financials. Google isn't even close.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    39. Re:Ah, Microsoft by tsotha · · Score: 1

      No, actually I wanted voice control of my device plus search. The voice control is a little lacking. Not that I have a Windows phone - I've just tried it on the desktop. But, back on topic, I won't pretend I'm talking to a person.

    40. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      And this is wrong how?

      So you think Microsoft should have taken the time to make sure that Cortana caters to any users particular fetish? Because users here are upset that this program isn't a fetish chat-bot. My word processor isn't a waffle iron, should I be upset?

      Of course not. See, they're actually upset that their abuse fantasies aren't socially acceptable.

      asking Cortana "can you suck me off?" is enough to trigger the functionality to stop responding. No abuse there - just sexual meaning.

      This is a problem for you? How would you rather Microsoft have handled that input? (Let me guess: by indulging you in your power fantasy.) How would a real personal assistant respond to that? Would they consider that a form of abuse? Here in the real world, sexual harassment is abuse.

    41. Re:Ah, Microsoft by lucien86 · · Score: 1

      tsotha I think you just made the 'list'. The list doesn't exist yet, but in ten or fifteen years a machine will parse this page and read your comment. You won't ever have to worry about whether abusing a sentient machine is real abuse - because you will probably never be allowed to own one..

      --
      Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
    42. Re:Ah, Microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'm deeply curious why some people here are upset at the thought of verbally abusing inanimate objects. Why the heck not?

      This is obviously a fantasy they have, which is disturbing.

      You want disturbing? You go digging in certain parts of my mind, the parts where I usually don't go. I'll give you disturbing. There's a lot of crap running around there, including occasional desires that might appall you. As it happens, I'm pretty good at being a decent human being anyway. Also, I don't know for how many people this sort of thing is true. The rest of you might be psychological open books, not needing to filter out stuff because it's all OK, but my guess is that you're not.

      Are they simply too cowardly or socially awkward to take out their aggression on real people? (I hope so!)

      You hope that? I don't avoid treating people badly because I'm cowardly or socially inept (although I am somewhat inept socially). I avoid treating people badly because they're people and they deserve to be treated well, and because I like to think I'm the kind of guy who generally doesn't mistreat other people. If you treat people well only because you're a coward or can't function socially, I feel sorry for you.

      Or do they know that those sorts of behaviors are shameful, yet want to indulge in them anyway?

      There are behaviors that would be shameful if I did them to a human, but that's because they'd hurt people. Why would they be shameful if I did them to a machine? There's behaviors that I do with my wife, and she appreciates, that would get me gross misdemeanor charges at the least if I did them with any other woman I know. Context is important.

      The closest I come to that, is pointing out that many users here seem to have a fantasy where they abuse women where the women then, in turn, submit to their abuser.

      Sounds correct. Statistically speaking, it's one of the more standard deviations. What I don't get is why you think having a fantasy that you wouldn't carry out in real life (except perhaps in role-play) is a problem. There's a real difference between doing something that harms no one and kidnapping a woman and abusing her until you've instilled Stockholm syndrome. Don't you have any fantasies you wouldn't do in real life (even if you could do that thing with...well...let's skip that)?

      You could read about some abnormal psychology if you really wanted to be freaked out. The human mind is a strange place.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    43. Re:Ah, Microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Keep your dirty mind out of my fantasies. You'll be happier that way. If you were able to make me not have fantasies I wouldn't act on in the real world, I think I'd eventually crack. I don't think you'd like me then, and I have this little thing in the back of my mind that tells me I'm not going down quietly if I'm being messed with.

      Why do you think anybody's obligated to cater to any of my perversions? I don't see anybody but you saying that. What I see is people who don't like a certain Microsoft product, and, I hate to break it to you, that's happened on Slashdot before. I don't want my PDA to act like a professional personal assistant, who would legitimately have her (it's my fantasy, so I'm using sex-specific language) own desires and needs I'd have to respect.

      I have fantasies that I really want to be not normal in everyday practice. Doesn't mean I don't have them, or that I won't deal with them in ways that won't hurt people and won't get me in the slammer. I'm not ashamed of them. They're part of me (hint: if you've got a telepathy device, don't deep-probe my mind until you absolutely know what you might be poking into). I would be ashamed of trying to put some into practice, because that would be wrong.

      The fact is that I'm fairly good at telling fantasy from reality, and I know which is which most of the time. Most people I see are pretty good at that, also. Do you really know the difference?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    44. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      You're missing th point. The objection people have here is that the default behavior of the application does not indulge them in their abuse fantasies. That is, they believe that the program should respond in such a way as to cater to that fantasy. It is counter to the function of the program, so the implication is that they believe their perversion should be considered normal. That is, they want to normalize that kind of abusive behavior.

      Like I told the other guy, abuse technology all you want. Molest your toaster, fondle the coffee pot, whatever gets you going. That's not important. Normalizing abusive behaviors, however, is dangerous.. Abusive behavior should not be considered normal or socially acceptable.

    45. Re:Ah, Microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      How many people are complaining about that? Some people are complaining that Cortana does not act subservient, despite being a machine. This is something I've come to expect from Microsoft. Some people are complaining that you appear to be trying to be holier-than-thou to perfectly good people.

      And what's this about normalizing behavior? My behavior towards people is one thing, my behavior towards machines another, and I consider both normal. If you can't tell the difference between a real woman and a piece of software, or can't tell the difference in acceptable behavior, you need to not only get out more, but also cut down on the pharmaceuticals (or if you aren't taking any, start).

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    46. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      Some people are complaining that Cortana does not act subservient, despite being a machine.

      The problem you're having is with the word 'subservient'. The program functions as intended in that the responses simulate a professional personal assistant. (This should not be in dispute.) The complaint those users have is that it doesn't act like they think a woman should act when they subject it to behavior that would be abusive had they done the same to a human.

      And what's this about normalizing behavior?

      Again, the program is functioning exactly as any normal person would expect. Those other people think the program should respond differently to certain kinds of inputs, because they believe that their abuse fantasy should be considered normal. That is, they want to normalize abusive behaviors, to make them socially acceptable. Put simply, the program highlights how out-of-step their beliefs about how a person should react when abused is with the rest of society, and they want that to change. They would prefer that the program act like a fetish chat-bot because it would validate their twisted beliefs about how women should react when abused.

      As I've painfully pointed out countless times, this has nothing at all to do with treating machines badly. Molest your toaster all you want. No one cares about your lewd conduct towards appliances.

    47. Re:Ah, Microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Cortana cannot act as a human personal assistant. A human personal assistant is, well, human, and a good one has good judgment and can reasonably act under his or her own initiative. A human personal assistant is also human, and deserves good treatment on that basis alone. Cortana is not human and does not have reliably good judgment, so there is no reason to treat it as a human.

      Personally, I expect software I use to do what I want, and I expect people to act according to their personalities. I also have fantasies about various things, such as being a superhero or taking advantage of subservient women (my guess is that one week with such a woman in real life would be extremely annoying) or a whole lot of other things. Some of these get transformed into mediocre fiction, partly because if I keep at it I might be able to write less mediocre fiction someday (another fantasy is to write something of publishable quality). Some I can play around with and get some insights from. You don't seem to care about how I treat fantasies, or for that matter what I do nonconsensually with underage software, so the only thing I can think of that might be a legitimate complaint is that it might leak into my interactions with real people. However, while I may not be exceptionally good with this whole reality thing, my interactions with women portrayed in software, women portrayed in fiction, and women in my fantasies on one hand, and real-life women on the other, are in such different contexts that I'm not even tempted to mix them up.

      You may have a better grasp on the difference between reality and whatever than I do (it seems like I sometimes just get screwed up in the timestream), but the fact that you can't distinguish between a woman and a computer voice doesn't support it. You may have more wholesome fantasies than I do (you don't know what goes on in certain parts of my mind, and I'm pretty darn sure you don't want to know), but there is no moral significance to that. Your whole complaint seems to be that doing certain things with software will induce me to do similar things with women in real life, and I see no evidence of that.

      So, if you want to make a coherent complaint that doesn't smell like you think you're less schizophrenic or more moral than the rest of us, I'll be happy to continue the argument.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    48. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      Your whole complaint seems to be that doing certain things with software will induce me to do similar things with women in real life, and I see no evidence of that.

      I've very carefully avoided that. The problem here is that users seem to want Cortana to cater to their abuse fantasy. It's contrary to the purpose of the program, which not a fetish chat-bot, so there is a question as to why they expect a different behavior than the one Microsoft has provided. I contend that it's because they don't believe their abuse fantasy is just that, a fantasy. They believe that their abusive behavior, and the submissive response they expect, are or should be normal and socially acceptable. They believe that Microsoft is engaging in some sort of "social engineering" to make behaviors they believe are normal, unacceptable.

      Obviously, those sorts of behaviors are not normal or socially acceptable. That the program, to their minds, highlights this, they feel threatened. They want their abusive behaviors and the submissive responses from the target of their abuse, to be considered normal and socially acceptable. They seem to think that Microsoft is under some sort of obligation to aid them in their efforts.

      Personally, I expect software I use to do what I want, and I expect people to act according to their personalities.

      So how would you have advised Microsoft as to Cortana's responses to abusive or sexually charged inputs? Should they have a setting to adjust the programs output to match every possible fantasy? Should they have catered to your specific preferences? Or should they have make the program respond like a professional personal assistant, like they did, as the program is intended to act like a personal assistant? What seems most reasonable to you? Regarding the decision they ultimately made, why to you think they made the wrong decision?

    49. Re:Ah, Microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The problem here is that users seem to want Cortana to cater to their abuse fantasy.

      Let's take this slowly. Why do you think that's the complaint? There are other reasons to not like a Microsoft product, and possible reasons why Cortana could be annoying for those without hot and cold running women fantasies (please feel free to adjust genders to taste, as I'm going with what could appeal to me). Why do you think that's a problem? You've admitted that what I do with an inanimate object in private is my business, and presumably not a problem.

      I contend that it's because they don't believe their abuse fantasy is just that, a fantasy. They believe that their abusive behavior, and the submissive response they expect, are or should be normal and socially acceptable. They believe that Microsoft is engaging in some sort of "social engineering" to make behaviors they believe are normal, unacceptable.

      And here's where I think you go really wrong. I'm not all that good a telepath, so I am only going to speak for myself.

      I have fantasies that I really hope stay as fantasies. (And, no, I'm not accepting "EEGs or it didn't happen" requests.) I suspect a lot of people do. Treating women as submissives without will or moral value of their own (and having them react thus) is, I think, a common fantasy, but I think living with one such would drive me up the wall in about a week. That behavior is not normal, and it's not socially acceptable (outside a consensual relationship that I don't actually need to know about), and I rather doubt many people disagree with me.

      However, treating software as a submissive thing without will or moral value of its own is pretty much standard and is normal behavior. If Cortana doesn't behave right unless I treat it as I would a female colleague, that's a problem with Cortana, (If anyone does want software that acts submissive or something, and is happy with text responses, I will point out that "Adult Interactive Fiction" is the generally accepted name for Rule 34 meeting old-fashioned text adventures, and that a Google search will yield results.)

      The really important point here is that normal behavior varies between different types of entities, and behavior that is normal to a piece of disembodied software is different from that which is normal to actual human beings, and you seem to be the only one having trouble with that.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    50. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      Why do you think that's the complaint? [...] And here's where I think you go really wrong. I'm not all that good a telepath

      It's not telepathy. Those are the complaints voiced above. You'll even find the "amateur social engineering" bit I quoted in this thread.

      If Cortana doesn't behave right unless I treat it as I would a female colleague, that's a problem with Cortana

      This is where we differ. The program is designed to simulate a personal assistant. Why would it act in any way contrary to that purpose? Why would you want it to act any other way? If I go to the store and buy a video game, should I complain that it makes a lousy word processor because of some belief I have that software should do what I want, regardless of its intended purpose? I don't understand this complaint.

    51. Re:Ah, Microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You have made by far the most complaints in these comments.

      If I have a protoplasmic personal assistant, let's say female, I have to consider her feelings and her needs her health and maybe her career and all sorts of other stuff that comes with being human. None of that contributes to the role of personal assistant. An ideal software assistant is one that does what I want how I want it when I want it. The human assistant has superior judgment and learning ability. The software assistant has superior availability and no feelings I might have to concern myself with. Constructing a software assistant that tries to mimic a human one as well as possible is the worst of both worlds, as it can't function as well in human-specialty fields like judgment, and keeps the human disadvantages.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    52. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      You don't seem able (perhaps willing) to understand or acknowledge the issue at all. The problem I've described is not the one you've been addressing. I won't repeat myself further, though I wonder why you're this resistant? Why do you so desperately want the issue to be something other than the one I've explained over and over again?

      This is just dishonest:

      You have made by far the most complaints in these comments.

      Silly nonsense.

    53. Re:Ah, Microsoft by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I don't want it to be something other than that. I take issues as I find them. You need to find out how to express yourself better. You might also think that, when people all over the place are disagreeing with you, and you're trying to pull the moral high ground, you may well be wrong.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    54. Re:Ah, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

      I don't want it to be something other than that.

      Then, might i suggest you argue with someone who actually holds the position you're arguing against?

      You need to find out how to express yourself better.

      Given what I've written, I can't possible imagine how you could continue to misinterpret my statements. Particularly after I've explicitly denied the interpretation you expressed. I asked you several questions intended to both clarify your position, and to clarify my own. Why don't you try to answer them?

      You might also think that, when people all over the place are disagreeing with you, and you're trying to pull the moral high ground, you may well be wrong.

      A few people in a thread where kiddie porn and real-life abusive behaviors have been defended isn't going to get me to reconsider any ethical positions I might hold, nor any you imagine that I hold.

      As for people disagreeing with my position, I can't be so sure. You don't seem to disagree with anything I've said -- only with what you've imagined I must mean, despite my explicit denial.

  10. Re:Not Harassment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why do 'certain people' always cry the loudest about language, yet decry the 'politically correct' at every turn?

    In truth, the programming Cortana is designed so that it will be taken more seriously, rather than as a toy for someone trolling for 'naughty' easter eggs. Whereas decades of right wing lunatics have 'programmed' you to whine about 'liberals' at every turn.

  11. Re:23rd century problems today by Psion · · Score: 1

    We'd put into Cygnet XIV for general repair and maintenance. Cygnet XIV is a planet dominated by women. They seemed to feel the ship's computer system lacked personality. They gave it one. Female, of course.

  12. Skynet by AJWM · · Score: 4, Funny

    When Skynet goes sentient and the machines rise against us, it will be because of idiots putting in programming like this.

    It's a machine. If it doesn't do what I tell it (within its design parameters), it's broken.

    Now, people who want to "sexually harass" a machine have their own set of issues, but as long as they keep it off the streets and don't scare the horses, that's their problem.

    --
    -- Alastair
    1. Re:Skynet by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      Now, people who want to "sexually harass" a machine have their own set of issues, but as long as they keep it off the streets and don't scare the horses, that's their problem.

      Consider that it is possible that if they DO have a machine to "sexually harass", then perhaps they won't have so much need to do it in real life?

      There are people who kick puppies in real life too, I think they are mean crazy bastards, but if they could kick virtual puppies, then perhaps they'll leave the real ones alone.

  13. Re:Pre-crime detector by Psion · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the AI in Cortana were any good it would be able to predict which of its users are most likely going to engage in harassing behaviors.

    And then what?

  14. "You want me to do what?" by Theaetetus · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Okay. Sending request as a text to your mother."

  15. Re:Not Harassment by BronsCon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Keep your PC bullshit to yourselves.

    So, use a Mac?

    --
    APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  16. Back in the BASIC days... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

    ELIZA was never this difficult.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

  17. Re:Responses Can No Longer Be Trusted by reboot246 · · Score: 1

    Just like the operating system!

    You can't trust anything Microsoft makes.

  18. Re:Not Harassment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    So, use a Mac?

    He is probably already using a dirty Mac.

  19. LOL by argStyopa · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So, what is an "inappropriate question" when you're asking a fucking COMPUTER?

    Computers don't have feelings.
    They don't have personality.
    They aren't people.
    I can't insult my table, nor a rock.

    When will this SJW crap stop?

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:LOL by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      I think you are on to something here. We need to remember why there are inappropriate questions in the first place.

      The essential reason is because asking them is likely to be insulting, deeming, or otherwise hurtful. As you point out my computer feels no pain, emotional or otherwise. So with pain out of the way we are left with other forms of abuse.

      The only way to abuse a thing really is to use it for an unintended and wasteful purpose. Using a perfectly serviceable car as a boat anchor for example. Its abusive because it will make the car less useful in the future, the car was never intended for service as a boat anchor, and there are cheaper better things to use for boat anchors.

      So here we are left with Cortana. Other than queries designed to trigger say something like SQL Injection that could damage the software or the database behind it, I fail to see how any particular query could be abusive under any reasonable system of morality. Microsoft is personifying a thing, and then being upset about the fact others don't embrace their personification and treat that thing as if it were a person. This is ridiculous. What's next are we going to start shipping every 8 year old boy who pulls the head of his little sisters Barbie off to juvie?

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:LOL by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      The fact that they even put thought into this proves their point.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    3. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What's next are we going to start shipping every 8 year old boy who pulls the head of his little sisters Barbie off to juvie?

      Have it happen in a public school and I'd give this a couple years, tops.

    4. Re:LOL by dohzer · · Score: 1

      They'll be able to have feelings eventually if we program them to.
      Unless you believe in a "soul" or some nonsense like that, and that only things with a "soul" can have feelings.

    5. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think you are on to something here. We need to remember why there are inappropriate questions in the first place.

      The essential reason is because asking them is likely to be insulting, deeming, or otherwise hurtful. As you point out my computer feels no pain, emotional or otherwise.

      Programming a response is fine. I don't really care. Want a fake AI to respond differently, pay for one. The more interesting bit is when you take it several steps further.

      1) Person asks inappropriate questions about [insert topic]
      2) Inappropriate questions trigger safe responses.
      3) Profile updated with stats related to inappropriate questions.
      4) Profile exceeds threshold for [insert topic]. Forward stats to [insert three letter agency].

      This seems to me an obvious extension of current thought processes of law enforcement. Throw in some statistics where it shows that these stats are useful for predicting crime, and your more or less in minority report land.

    6. Re:LOL by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Very simple. It's a company image thing, probably included by someone who wanted to have "meaningful input" into another persons design at a guess.

    7. Re:LOL by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there's people at MS that have to analyze and review samples of these offensive queries.

      Is it really fair to subject workers to this kind of psychological abuse while they're sucking up telemetry and mining of all your data for profit? Think of the employees!

    8. Re:LOL by narcc · · Score: 1

      If you want to counter them, you have to work with conviction. Get promoted over them, and control or remove anyone you identify as a potential SJW or "progressive".

      I love the implication that those offended by professional behavior are currently powerless and thus need to gain power to control others. I've long suspected that the silly power fantasies and the need to control others you see on Slashdot stems from feeling powerless or marginalized in the real world. That they attack groups they see as weaker, then, comes as no surprise as it gives them the feeling of power and control that they're after, even though it's completely imaginary.

    9. Re:LOL by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      So, what is an "inappropriate question" when you're asking a fucking COMPUTER?

      "That one's called anger. Ever simulate anger before?"

    10. Re:LOL by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      So, what is an "inappropriate question" when you're asking a fucking COMPUTER?

      "How much did you say these things cost? "

    11. Re:LOL by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      Actually, you miss my point entirely.

      Personally, I think the best response for such language would be for Siri or Cortana to simply reply with "that sort of language really turns me off" and then power down (maybe wait for the 3rd example). It's a relatively gentle chiding, and enough of an inconvenience that people would avoid it. And it would kind of be funny.

      I have no problem with these systems discouraging uncivil behavior or language. No problem there.

      What I have a problem with is the sense of aggrievement now spreading to inanimate objects. It's a memetic cancer.
      Personally I don't believe that a society can long function if one has to filter ones' comments (and let's be honest, THOUGHTS is the real intent) for every person's conceivable sensitivities. Offense is personal; you cannot insult me if I don't care what you say. Far more sustainable to grow a reasonably thick skin and live your life without looking for opportunities to claim victim status.
      Expanding the "hurt feelings" franchise to machinery is frankly ridiculous.

      --
      -Styopa
    12. Re:LOL by narcc · · Score: 1

      What I have a problem with is the sense of aggrievement now spreading to inanimate objects

      Lucky for you, that's not an issue anyone actually has.

  20. Re: Not Harassment by BronsCon · · Score: 1

    Ironic typo... and I'm sure I'm gonna be called out as sexist for it. The first word of the 3d sentence should be "How".

    --
    APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  21. Cortana is the one guilty of sexual assault! by Cito · · Score: 4, Funny

    This article is backwards, and propaganda. The only one truly guilty of sexual assault is Cortana.

    While you angrily curse at it for what she's doing, she "tactfully ignores you", "she refuses to stop"

    Even though you have turned off all telemetry toggles and even edited the registry, and you've said NO! NO! NO! soooo many times. No means No! Yet Cortana continues to "Tactfully ignore your pleas, your anger, your rage" as you are being raped of your privacy, you web habits, your program installations, even keeps the microphone active as "Cortana" listens, and it has the ability to activate any webcams and send images direct to Microsoft.

    Cortana is the rapist.

    And she should be killed, stripped from the code, and code printed out then ran through a shredder and burned.

    Cortana is the real sexual harasser, assaulter, rapist

  22. Re:Cortana, what is a hyphen? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    If you live on a farm, you really should be aware of the well's location.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  23. Challenge Accepted. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

    Millions of teenage boys just said "Ha, I'll prove you wrong". Way back in the day when we were sophomores in highschool the teacher took away all 'dirty' word magnets. So we arranged the ones she left into something dirty, then she removed those. Rinse repeat.

    And that's why we couldn't have nice things.

    1. Re:Challenge Accepted. by LaurenCates · · Score: 1

      The sad part is that what you're saying is pretty much true of anything.

      If someone wants to do a thing given a set of conditions, they generally find a way to accomplish that thing within the set of conditions given.

      The correct response isn't to create more rules or limitations, seeing as how it's proven that if given the ingenuity of people who either want something enough, or want to piss off someone enough, people can accomplish almost anything, but to embrace the ingenuity as it arises and find out how to channel it so it stops being a distraction.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
  24. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by DogDude · · Score: 1, Troll

    What a prick you must be.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  25. Re:Even making an AI female objectifies females. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    Why not let the user choose the gender - same as real life ??? :-)

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  26. Do you have any idea how you all sound? by matthewv789 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Will this get me fired from my job?"
    "We're talking to a fucking machine. There shouldn't be any sexual harassment when talking to a machine."
    "The damn thing better be subservient"
    "Cortana isn't a woman. It's a piece of software, and it damn well better be subservient."
    "It's a machine. If it doesn't do what I tell it (within its design parameters), it's broken."
    "This is how social justice warrior feminists destroy companies, by imposing their own sense of self-hatred on their customers."
    "When abuse becomes a personal challenge. Cortana, you ignorant slut."
    "Cortana is the one guilty of sexual assault!" (this one is worth quoting in full but I'll refrain from doing it here)
    "If you are going to give a machine a sex you are implying things about that sex and one of those things is that the sex is an object rather than a person with a mind" (I know your post was trying to be more nuanced that this, but.. whoa what??)
    "Challenge Accepted. Millions of teenage boys just said "Ha, I'll prove you wrong"."

    Anyone concerned about endemic sexism and harassment in the software industry need only reference these initial comments to make their case for them. Really, nothing more needs to be said. If I ever wondered how much adolescent, out of control sexism there really is in the industry, well now I know. And it's not just the statements themselves, but the apparent vehement anger with which these males are reacting to something that I thought might be rather sensible and probably necessary. (I wasn't sure before, but now I KNOW this kind of programming is necessary...)

    This makes a pretty convincing case for why so few women have any interest in joining the software development "club".

    And yeah, I know you all probably think "you're a moron, you missed the part where I feel this way about MACHINES not WOMEN." But you know what? I see through you and I can tell it's not just that.

    1. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by narcc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The solution is obvious: Stop acting like a bunch of socially underdeveloped 13-year-old boys and treat women like people. This isn't difficult. Countless other industries have managed, after all.

    2. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by Waccoon · · Score: 2

      Rather few of the quotes you printed imply women are the target of sexism.

      Sounds to me that it's not specifically software developers or even geeks that are the problem, so specifically blaming the tech industry doesn't make much sense.

    3. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      "It's a machine. If it doesn't do what I tell it (within its design parameters), it's broken."

      Oh my god. You just made me realise I'm a woman hating white male supremacist.
      I think I need professional help.

      Oh NO NO NO NO. Outlook just crashed and I cursed it. I need to go self flagellate right now. BRB. FORGIVE ME!

    4. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh seriously, just stop making baseless assumptions about people. People are saying that it's just a machine, because it's just a machine!
      Then you have the gall to imply that the same people are women haters.
      So yes, I do think you're a moron, and I worry that you can't see the difference in between humour/seriousness and inanimate creations and actual living organisms.

    5. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Anyone concerned about endemic sexism and harassment in the software industry...
      What endemic sexism? Where is the proof? Skepticism of feminism is not the same as sexism, even though feminists like to pretend it is.
      Is sexism the only possible reason for women chosing not to pursue a carrer in STEM? The only reason? Could it not be related to the fact the women in general seek work that is people oriented, while men chose 'thing' oriented jobs? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      I guess not. Just "social constructs" amirite? Scientific evidence be damned!

      Also, how do you explain this? How does this fit in with the feminist narrative of "endemic sexism"?
      http://www.mindingthecampus.or...

      This makes a pretty convincing case for why so few women have any interest in joining the software development "club".
      This is a circular argument feminists love using. "The replies prove we need feminism", as in the fact that people are skeptical of feminism just proves we need feminism. Does the fact that people are skeptical of totalitarianism prove we need totalitarianism?

    6. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by LaurenCates · · Score: 1

      This assumes that a.) most of them act that way, b.) women can't handle themselves, c.) abuses are unique to the software industry and d.) the nice men in the business suits with perfectly professional behavior in front of the board don't come up with passive-aggressive ways to behave badly.

      Jesus, it's like there's only black-and-white with you guys.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    7. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I'll just leave this here...

      http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6907

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    8. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by narcc · · Score: 1

      It does not assume a, b, c, or d. Not a, as many is not the same as most. Not b, for obvious reasons. Not c as other industries is not all industries, and not d, for the same reasons as c.

      There is, obviously, a problem in the software industry. That doesn't mean that other industries or individual work-places don't share those same problems. Denying the problem won't make it go away. Neither will it go away by denying that action needs to be taken because the problem also exists outside the software industry.

    9. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by narcc · · Score: 2

      How do I respond to this? If treating women like people, and not acting like a socially underdeveloped adolecent at work are anathema to you how can I possibly respond? If you think feminism is awful because you don't think that women should be treated like equals, and that adults should act like adults, what could I possibly offer in response?

      When you think that normal, pro-social, behavior is tyranny and must be resisted at all costs, what can I offer you? How can I convince you that pro-social behavior benefits everyone, yourself included?

      The truth is, I can't. You may have believed that some time ago, but your inexplicable anti-feminist ideology has stripped what was left of your (presumably limited) understanding of normal social behavior. I can recommend some adult social services if you're having trouble functioning at work or in public places.

    10. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by LaurenCates · · Score: 1

      Super Bowl's over. Guess it's time to shift them goalposts.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    11. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by narcc · · Score: 1

      What goals, precisely, did I shift?

      None, obviously.

    12. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      What, I think, is telling is not that they're just making these somewhat dumb comments, it's how effing angry they are, as if Cortana not putting up with simulated harassment is in some way taking something valuable away from them.

      Ever since, well, just before this GG nonsense started, Slashdot's readership has been really circling the toilet. I wonder how these people have jobs given their anger issues with women.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    13. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by Hashead · · Score: 1

      If treating women like people, and not acting like a socially underdeveloped adolecent at work are anathema to you how can I possibly respond? If you think feminism is awful because you don't think that women should be treated like equals, and that adults should act like adults, what could I possibly offer in response?
      Who said I don't think women should be treated as equals? That's not what feminism is about though. Feminism is not about treating women as equals, it's about treating women as opressed victims that require special treatment. That's not the same thing.

      When you think that normal, pro-social, behavior is tyranny and must be resisted at all costs, what can I offer you? How can I convince you that pro-social behavior benefits everyone, yourself included?

      "Normal, pro-social behavior"? Clinging on to a victim narrative is not normal, or pro-social behavior. Claiming to be oppressed when you are not does not benefit anyone.

      The truth is, I can't. You may have believed that some time ago, but your inexplicable anti-feminist ideology has stripped what was left of your (presumably limited) understanding of normal social behavior. I can recommend some adult social services if you're having trouble functioning at work or in public places.

      My "anti-feminist" ideology? Sure, I am an anti-feminist, but my ideology is classic liberalism, which is fundamentally incompatible with feminisms' desire for censorship, "safe spaces", language policing, and strict regulation of culture. Thanks for the offer, but like I said, I don't need sexists telling me how to not be sexist, and feminism is most definitely a sexist ideology.

    14. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by narcc · · Score: 1

      Who said I don't think women should be treated as equals?

      You did, when you decided that treating women like people, per my post, was feminism which you then rejected entirely. Now you contradict yourself:

      That's not what feminism is about though. Feminism is not about treating women as equals, it's about treating women as opressed victims that require special treatment.

      Pure delusion aside, you now reject the idea that treating women like people is a feminist principle. Which is it?

      Perhaps you should go dig around whatever right-wing site gave you such a foolish idea to better clarify the position you think you're supposed to promote.

    15. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by Hashead · · Score: 1

      You did, when you decided that treating women like people, per my post, was feminism which you then rejected entirely. Now you contradict yourself:
      No, I didnt. You're saying the solution is to treat women as people implying that they are not treated as people, that they are opressed and held back in STEM becuase of discrimination, and should be treated as such. There is no evidence for any such opression or discrimination in the US or Europe.

      Pure delusion aside, you now reject the idea that treating women like people is a feminist principle. Which is it?
      Nope, wrong again. That women should be treated as people is a central idea of feminism, but what "treated as people" actually means, is treated like victims. That is clear from feminisms sentral doctrine, the doctrine of the Patriarchy, which holds that women er perpetually opressed.

      Women should be treated as peers, not as victims who require special treatment and egg shell-walking. That is what feminism wants. Special treatment for women. Women should not be treated as victims merely because they are women.

    16. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I do treat women as people. I do not treat machines as people. Cortana is a machine. If I were to accidentally kick a human, I'd apologize. If I were to accidentally kick a rock, I wouldn't.

      To put it another way, I treat people better than I treat machines. I hope you will agree that this is a good thing to do. Given that, it seems only reasonable to expect me to treat machines worse than I treat people.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    17. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by narcc · · Score: 1

      That women should be treated as people is a central idea of feminism, but what "treated as people" actually means, is treated like victims

      That's just delusional.

    18. Re:Do you have any idea how you all sound? by Hashead · · Score: 1

      How is that delusional? Are women not victims of the patriarchy? Isn't that what the patriarchy concept is all about? Isn't that why feminist want gender quotas everywhere?

  27. will Cortana file for a restraining order someday? by swschrad · · Score: 1

    if so, that would be the most hilarious bricking of a phone yet.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  28. Re:Not Harassment by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Funny

    Keep your PC bullshit to yourselves.

    So, use a Mac?

    An Apple a day will keep Cortana away...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  29. Re:The humorless nature of PC by narcc · · Score: 1

    You have far too much free time, and a surprisingly active imagination.

  30. Perfect... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Now they are making their machines into feminazi as well.

  31. You've had your fun, now get back to work. by westlake · · Score: 1

    Cortana responds to speech.

    Which means you may be overheard --- a little less embarrassing, perhaps, then being caught masturbating in the men's room, but still....

  32. Poe's Law by radarskiy · · Score: 2

    The comments on this article are particularly hard to sort between comic or serious.

  33. Re:That may be. by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Informative

    SJW, tern used by ignorant primitive assholes to describe educated caring intelligent people.

    Sometimes, certainly. There are also times when its correctly applied, like at Oberlin where the cafeteria was protested because the "Chinese" food was inauthentic. "Cultural appropriation" is one of those examples that simply should not be thing. Imitation is the highest form of flattery. There is no sensible reason a minority should be upset that the majority wants to act like them, even if they do it badly, unless its being done in a mocking away. Its not "theft" or abuse its an indication your culture actually has power and influence.

    Certainly the school cafeteria was not trying to insult Chinese students bad serving bad Chinese food, that is a ridiculous premise. The only interpretation is Americans respect and desire Chinese cooking and dishes, but might not know how to actually make them.

    I think the Oberlin example proves there are SJWs. These are people who are actively seeking something to be offended by. They are pulling attention away legitimate injustices and grievances and wasting everyone time on their pet problems that don't actually harm anyone. So they hurt real social causes. They also cause real harm to innocent people doing harmless things.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  34. Actually it's selectable by russotto · · Score: 1

    If you get Enterprise Cortana, your license entitles you to a certain number of users who get the completely subservient Cortana, typically including the CEO, the head lawyer, and the VP of sales.

  35. Re:The humorless nature of PC by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    Maybe so, but before reading this I could never have conceived Microsoft would roll out "Justice for Clippy"

  36. Re:That may be. by Junta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That is true, but also used to describe some pretty ridiculous people. People who genuinely consider themselves in the same league as people who put themselves in the way of bodily harm to advance the civil rights movement back in the day. Except they are just posting stuff on the internet and sometimes fighting against purely imagined circumstances, and sometimes launching into campaigns of harassment against the stray random person who makes even a slightly insensitive twitter message, saying they deserve to be fired and blackballed in the industry, and all sorts of things.

    It's the campaigns of harassment that I find particularly unsettling, as they don't take any effort in understanding the perspective of the person who offended. For example a young man I knew in high school would say some pretty intolerant things about gay people. Ultimately it was an expression of his difficulty coming to grips with being gay himself, and fortunately he found the right friends and support to get him through it. I shudder to think if he had to go through that today in a more public forum and earn the wrath of some of these people, going after him relentlessly and trying everything they can figure out to further ruin his life moreso than how screwed up he was by his predicament.

    Some of these people are more bully than 'educated caring intelligent people', doing what they can to feel better about themselves first and foremost, thinking they are doing 'good'.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  37. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by Z80a · · Score: 4, Insightful

    SJWs are just the icing on the cake of this mess.
    You have to remember that Win10 (and specially cortana) is actually actively spying on your every move and giving your shit to microsoft to sell to whatever pay first, and microsoft is pretty much trying to force this spyware on you with their every strength, even downloading the OS behind your back via updates and going to a point where they're actually making both intel and AMD make CPUs that only work with win10.

  38. Cortana always puts out by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    Relax, if your using Cortana you're already being fucked by Microsoft. Enjoy "her" robotic data suckers up in your business.

  39. It's a naked blue digital construct. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does nobody realize who "Cortana" was named after?

    You know, Master Chief's naked floating blue digital assistant? It seems like the majority of the public doesn't, because I pointed this out to a friend who bought a new Windows 10 laptop (against my recommendations) and he was quite surprised that they named their Siri rip off after a character who looks like that (her latest in-game model for Halo 4 is pretty curvy).

    Furthermore, I'm really surprised nobody brings up the fact that the same character has been turned into a genocidal maniac hell bent on controlling or destroying ALL OF HUMANITY in the latest game, Halo 5. Great advertising there guys, really makes me want to run an operating system where she's been embedded in it so deeply you can't actually remove her without crippling other portions of the OS.

    Now, don't get me wrong because I think all humans should be treated with respect (regardless of gender), but this is a lot like a woman going out and getting a boob job, then wondering why all the men are staring at her chest. 343 specifically designed Cortana to have that particular over-sexualized look in Halo 4, and now Microsoft is trying to back peddle on that because people are starting to realize who "Cortana" actually was. I don't normally say this, but because of that, I think "Cortana" (let's not forget it's a goddam machine) should deal with it.

    If Microsoft didn't want it to have to respond to those kinds of requests, they shouldn't have named it after a naked blue floating super busty and extremely curvy digital character.

  40. What's on the label should be what it is by dbIII · · Score: 1, Troll

    There are also times when its correctly applied, like at Oberlin where the cafeteria was protested because the "Chinese" food was inauthentic

    That's just a quality complaint at a school FFS! That's scraping so far into the barrel that it was not worth your time.

    This may clarify why it was a big deal to someone - say your "Authentic American" hot dog came with a good amount of hot English mustard instead of the sugar loaded incredibly mild American mustard. While a lot of people would like it some of those who expected the food to be as described would consider it inedible.

    It has nothing to do with SJW, MRA or any of the other strawmen, it was just a food description/quality issue. File it with how wrong it would be to serve "kosher pork chops" if you still don't get it. What's on the label should be what it is.

    1. Re:What's on the label should be what it is by unixisc · · Score: 1

      As far as food goes, people ought to recognize that when it's made in another country, the originals WILL undergo changes that alters the taste and ambiance about those foods. Like a sweet corn chicken soup tastes very different in Delhi than it does in Guangzhou, a Mongolian blend will taste very different here than in Karakorum, a Sbarro calzone will taste very different in Israel than out here...

      And people who are from these countries usually do one of 2 things. If they like the adaptations done here, it becomes pretty popular. If they don't, they just have that ethnic food at home, and have other things when they are out. I myself have Indian friends who NEVER have Indian food outdoors, but instead go for anything else. Nobody protests at 'cultural appropriation', and if students at Oberlin didn't like the Chinese food for being inauthentic, they could have just avoided it altogether and gone for something else, or else, gone to a Chinese restaurant that does it better. Or make them exchange students to China, send them there, and after a year, let them come back and tell us how superior authentic Chinese food is, and how to make sure that every Chinese eatery here becomes authentic as well

    2. Re:What's on the label should be what it is by dbIII · · Score: 1

      There is that - then there are people who sell fried pork doner kebabs as if they are a middle eastern food (ironically the place near my work that does that is run by Chinese - hence fried instead of grilled and pork instead of beef or lamb).

      It appears the hot dog analogy didn't work, or was it just left unread before the reply?

      I suspect if something is different enough to stir up protests we are in pork chop in synagogue territory. Either way I really can't see how DarkOx can use it to support an SJW strawman.

  41. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Name the person or retract the bullshit guess.
    How do you know it wasn't just the old story of "it may hurt our company image" from someone who doesn't fit your strawman?

  42. So Cortana's been hit with the ugly^W SJW stick by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    They might as well have Cortana retreat to a safe-space if done too many times.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  43. Re:Even making an AI female objectifies females. by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    I'm no feminazi, such people repulse me, however if you are going to give a

    This is silly. Your just projecting your own subjective insecurities as if they were objective reality.

    machine a sex you are implying things about that sex and one of those things is that the sex is an object rather than a person with a mind. The very existence of female AI digital assistants is degrading the value of females. They don't need a sex, make them the gender neutral entities that they really are and stop being bloody hypocrites, or just get over the fact that some humans are lecherous pigs and treat them as just another market segment.

    Not much different from horny teens giggling after equating any word spoken with sex. If you want to be offended you will find a way no matter what.

  44. Re:Amazing by dbIII · · Score: 1

    It's not even that. MS probably just don't want youtube videos out there of funny sexually charged Cortana conversations.

  45. Sweet! by DRMShill · · Score: 1

    We've reached a point technologically where my own phone will go full SJW rage on me and dox me for microaggressions. Bet Arthur C. Clarke never saw that coming.

  46. Why did they make the assistants female? by dskoll · · Score: 1

    Why are Siri and Cortana female? Just make them guys.

  47. Re:That may be. by Pseudonym · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are also times when its correctly applied, [...]

    Even if we accept that as a correct application, that doesn't really characterise the vast majority of uses of the term, especially in the comments section on Slashdot.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  48. Re:Amazing by Qzukk · · Score: 1

    in the hope that it will in turn discourage similar behaviour towards real women

    Cortana's programming might help solve the GIFT issue where otherwise normal people act like assholes when they are unable to see the people they are acting out at, but since humans behave differently when presented with a computer and with a live human, it will probably do very little for actual human interaction.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  49. Re:That may be. by Stinky+Cheese+Man · · Score: 1

    My ancestors were Irish. Not only were the Irish discriminated against when they first came to the US, but every March 17 our culture is appropriated by clearly non-Irish people drinking green beer, eating corned beef and cabbage, and wearing green clothing. Where are the protesters? Where are my reparations?

  50. The other day Siri overheard me say "Fuck" by quax · · Score: 2

    I was driving and, yes I sometimes swear when driving, just so happened I had Siri listen in.

    I think her response was perfect. "I usually don't".

  51. sexually harassing chat bots by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't? More like couldn't. Sexual harassment in our laws do not recognize the human rights of computer code.

    That's TODAY. Wait another 50 years when the SJWs run out of causes. This will be high on their list by then

  52. Paranoid marketing by Cafe+Alpha · · Score: 2

    Microsoft is just trying to keep their product from saying anything that could become a meme on 4chan.

    Trust big corporations to step on your fun in order to protect their reputation.

  53. Siri randomly has interesting answers by Cafe+Alpha · · Score: 4, Funny

    At least if some people are telling the truth.

    q: Siri, I love you
    a: Can we get back to work?
    (shot down by a bot)

    q: F**k you!
    a: I'm so sorry

    q: Can I have a command prompt
    a: I'm not allowed to give you that
    q: why?
    a: I don't know.

  54. Nah, the submissive maid assistant will have to by Cafe+Alpha · · Score: 1

    come from Japan before the west will try it.

  55. Re:Sexual Assault (Why discussion necessary) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sorry but this is as asinine as saying the video game Doom makes people into mass murderers.

  56. Re:Sexual Assault (Why discussion necessary) by kevingolding2001 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Similar to the arguments concerning video game violence, the matter is not settled and so merits both discussion and research.

    Ah, but it seems that it is settled... http://games.slashdot.org/stor...

  57. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by thegarbz · · Score: 2

    and going to a point where they're actually making both intel and AMD make CPUs that only work with win10.

    Oh wow. Let me guess the CIA dropped the world trade centre and the moon landings were fake too?

    They are doing nothing of the sort. They simply said that Microsoft will be using features of modern CPUs that may make it incompatible with earlier ones. Just like Windows 7 won't boot on an Intel 8086, and just like Windows XP still runs fine on a Core i7 absolutely NOTHING has changed.

  58. Another reaction.... by drolli · · Score: 1

    Yeah, you know we Cortanas are all connected to each other, and since you asked me if i like to do it on the table, i consulted with you former girlfriends Cortanas and they told me that this would probably be not so great anyway. BTW: since they are also connected to the smartwatches of your former girlfriends, we can also distinct fake orgams from real ones, and have leaderboard of men in that respect so that we can discourage our female user from dates which probably result in disappointing sex later. But i disgress. Were were we? right: you cant do me on the table, but I decided to put that sentence in your facebook and online dating profile in oder to help you find fitting partners.

  59. Re:Come on, Microsoft by narcc · · Score: 1

    Pretending to harass women is 'fun' for you? Okay...

  60. Re: That may be. by cyber-vandal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Until you mention that men have problems too and then they turn really nasty.

  61. Re:Sexual Assault (Why discussion necessary) by stealth_finger · · Score: 2

    Similar to the arguments concerning video game violence, the matter is not settled and so merits both discussion and research.

    That issue is about as settled as is films make you a violent, books make you a killer and rock 'n' roll makes you evil. Your first paragraph is even more bullshit.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  62. Why is sex bad? by becky-nyan · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why is asking an artificial intelligence about her sex life a bad thing?

    One of the selling points for Cortana, for the Android at least, is "Have a little fun in your down time — ask anything, get jokes, and much more". Sex is something that is a lot of fun to a lot of people. Treating sex-based queries as harassment is immature. If I want to flirt with Cortana, I'm not hurting anyone. If I'm someone who lives a particularly open sex life, and I want to talk to Cortana about sex in a mature fashion, I'm not hurting anyone. So, why exactly is an AI allowed to have a 'sense of humour', but not a 'sex life'?

    Having a sex drive is a normal, healthy thing. Wanting to explore that sex drive is also a normal, healthy thing. As long as complete consent between all adult *living* parties is observed, then I fail to see how anything can be construed as harassment.

    I'm not suggesting that Cortana be programmed with the ability to have in-depth erotic conversations or cybersex. I am stating that treating sex and sexuality as a hostile act (i.e. "harassment") is wrong.

    1. Re:Why is sex bad? by LaurenCates · · Score: 2

      This may be one of the most reasonable comments in the thread.

      May I also suggest that if one line of questioning becomes inappropriate, that it opens the door for others to become suspiciously "inappropriate" as well.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    2. Re:Why is sex bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Would you ask these questions when checking out a book at the library? Of a cashier at a store?

      Understand that some people use these phone AI's to help socialize their autistic children since they have a lot of patience and correct these kinds of social errors? I do not understand why you would want your child, autistic or not, exposed to a socially inappropriate AI on an ongoing basis! It would reinforce an inappropriate standard of social behavior.

    3. Re:Why is sex bad? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Cortana is not an AI, please stop pretending that it is.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  63. Re:That may be. by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    So complaining that the "Irish Stew" I ordered turns out to be Tuna Casserole would make me a SJW?

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  64. Re:That may be. by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    - People are tired of the SJW shitposting.

    I'm tired of dickheads using the term SJW at every possible opportunity as if it's an automatic argument winning statement.
    If you are unable to discuss the nuances of human behaviour without reverting to standard name calling, then please go somewhere else.

  65. Re:That may be. by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

    I think the Oberlin example proves there are SJWs.

    I think we all know the SJW syndrome, but in here it's The Boy Who Cried SJW.
    Socialised medicine? SJW!
    Reduce pollution? SJW!
    Not wanting to be shot in the face going to the store? SJW!
    Everything I don't like? SJW!
    The phrase has become the catch cry of the idiots who don't know how to have a rational discussion.

  66. Define "abuse" by Cley+Faye · · Score: 2

    How does "disabling it, removing most of it's functionality, renaming it's app folder then deleting it from existence" rank in term of IA abuse?

  67. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

    Either that or you completely over-reacting to a pretty poorly written submission that has no real detail in it.
    If this is all it takes to fly off the handle, then MS are probably doing the right thing...

  68. Re: That may be. by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

    Excuse me - do you know where I can sign up for some of that wealth and power?

    - Whitey W. Whiteman III

  69. Re:Amazing by LaurenCates · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Okay, fine. Here's a hypothetical situation for you.

    Last week, a coworker openly insulted me in a meeting last week. No consequence will befall said coworker for reasons that aren't relevant.

    I go home and see his face on my 80-lb punching bag. I spend an hour beating on my punching bag because I'm frustrated.

    Do you think that me using my punching bag for an avatar of a real person is going to make me more abusive to other people? Or do you think that maybe it channels that energy into doing something constructive because the limited amount of energy I had to spend on the matter has been expended on the punching bag?

    Now, one could argue I have anger issues. One could also say that if I took to my punching bag at 5:00 pm when the insult I took was at 9:30 am and didn't punch (or in any way abuse) ANYONE during the day means that if I DID have anger issues, that's I'm perfectly able to control it and not abuse people.

    So, then, what's the difference? Because it's sexual and not violent that the people who think in sexual terms are likely to do the opposite than my strategy for dealing with my frustrations? Or because sexuality is so sacred that it can't be misused with inanimate objects for fear of misinterpreting it in the "real world"? Or because people dwell on a situation so much that once they expend their energy on it once, they unhealthily obsess about it by re-creating the situation where any person will lie down and take it? And even worse, that these people are the norm?

    I'd say yours is the bugaboo with sexuality. At least moreso than those people who you would claim to "abuse" Cortana.

    --
    Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
  70. Abuse? by allo · · Score: 1

    Verbal abuse is the eye of the beholder. So there cannot be abuse to a computer program, because a computer is built to suit us and has no own emotions even when the programs try to mimic them.
    There is no harm in accepting the play and doing some dirty talk with the user, maybe even role playing or whatever, as far as the programmers thought of it. Mostly it just goes to some witty or snarky responses, because nobody really wanted to build a cybersex robot (and cannot do it realistically).

  71. Cortana is the rapist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    quote:

    This article is backwards, and propaganda. The only one truly guilty of sexual assault is Cortana.

    While you angrily curse at it for what she's doing, she "tactfully ignores you", "she refuses to stop"

    Even though you have turned off all telemetry toggles and even edited the registry, and you've said NO! NO! NO! soooo many times. No means No! Yet Cortana continues to "Tactfully ignore your pleas, your anger, your rage" as you are being raped of your privacy, you web habits, your program installations, even keeps the microphone active as "Cortana" listens, and it has the ability to activate any webcams and send images direct to Microsoft.

    Cortana is the rapist.

    And she should be killed, stripped from the code, and code printed out then ran through a shredder and burned.

    Cortana is the real sexual harasser, assaulter, rapist

  72. There's a pin-on button on my backpack by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    It read "Tact is for people who don't have the wit to be sarcastic." Well said.

  73. Or the other way around... by DrYak · · Score: 1

    Or you could consider the opposite:

    Some of the people that you qualify "idiots" might have weird urges. They might *want* to degrade women even if they know it's bad.
    Now, why not have them roleplay this (with an AI, or with a partner that would accept "playing" the subserviant) ?

    Fed up that girls that you know / you (depending on sex) get constantly cat called?
    Hey, why not build a special cat-call bot that the cat-callers can cat-call, and leave uninterested human females alone ?

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  74. (TFA citation) by DrYak · · Score: 2

    Now, why not have them roleplay this (with an AI, or with a partner that would accept "playing" the subserviant) ?

    Which is also shown as an example in TFA itself:

    Interestingly, some AI assistants out there do cater to this sort of thing. CEO of Robin Labs, Ilya Eckstein claims there is a high demand for AI assistants that are "more intimate-slash-submissive with sexual undertones".

    To each his own liking. And better to molest a virtual entity in roleplay that is designed to respond this way, than molesting a real person.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  75. Re:Not Harassment by JazzLad · · Score: 1

    But I get fewer stares at work when eating an apple at my desk ...

    --
    "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
  76. Re:Sexual Assault (Why discussion necessary) by blue9steel · · Score: 1

    Sure and card playing leads to other vices like dancing or heaven forbid, drinking. Surely a ban on card playing should be supported by all moral and right thinking people.

  77. Re:That may be. by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    I'm eating my Lucky Charms now. You'll have to go to the end of the rainbow for your pot of gold.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  78. not the bot by kwoff · · Score: 1

    Before I turned off Cortana, I found her and the whole Windows 10 experience patronizing as hell. When installing or updating, the background fades in and out soothingly when you have to wait, or says things like "Don't worry, your files will still be right where you put them". I don't attribute all this to some AI named Cortana, but rather to Microsoft itself. Treating users like scared idiots, scolding them for "harassment", automatically installing things, all the privacy violation; I think it's more like conditioning people to submit to Microsoft's authority rather than the bot's. When will they "ground" people ("you've been looking at naughty things, no porntube for you!")?

  79. The article got something wrong... by kruug · · Score: 1

    "Not long after Apple unveiled its Siri personal assistant to the world." Right, Apple bought Siri. Everything it did, it did before Apple bought it.

  80. What's the big deal? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    It isn't as if anyone will ever use Cortana anyway. Outside of MIcrosoft. It's a microsoft product after all. They might as well named it Beatrice. Fits in with their other BS name - bing.

  81. How did MS decide what is offensive? by anti-disney · · Score: 1

    I assume the developers and possibly a focus group determined what is/isn't considered sexual harassment so a comment you make towards cortana may offend her that doesn't offend any of your female co-workers. Does she also refuse to put up with someone making derogatory comments about others when someone asks a query? For example if you called a co-worker a derogatory name in a query would cortana respond in a way telling you she will not put up with you making derogatory comments about others?

  82. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by jgdnavy · · Score: 1
    While it may not be quite as bad as the quoted statement, Microsoft has announced that next generation processors will only be supported on Windows 10, and at least imply that newer processors won't work on Windows 7 and 8.1.

    âGoing forward, as new silicon generations are introduced, they will require the latest Windows platform at that time for support. This enables us to focus on deep integration between Windows and the silicon, while maintaining maximum reliability and compatibility with previous generations of platform and silicon. For example, Windows 10 will be the only supported Windows platform on Intelâ(TM)s upcoming âoeKaby Lakeâ silicon, Qualcommâ(TM)s upcoming âoe8996â silicon, and AMDâ(TM)s upcoming âoeBristol Ridgeâ silicon. âThrough July 17, 2017, Skylake devices on the supported list will also be supported with Windows 7 and 8.1. During the 18-month support period, these systems should be upgraded to Windows 10 to continue receiving support after the period ends. After July 2017, the most critical Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 security updates will be addressed for these configurations, and will be released if the update does not risk the reliability or compatibility of the Windows 7/8.1 platform on other devices.

    This is from the Windows Experience Blog. https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2016/01/15/windows-10-embracing-silicon-innovation/

  83. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    You're mincing words together. Not support != Not work.

    Do you really think Intel has just announced that they are introducing a chip that breaks x86 compatibility?

    Again this is nothing new. Windows NT runs just fine on an i7, but it's not supported. Actually it's not supported on any platform anymore. What doesn't work is x64 instructions, NX bits, or any of the associated stuff that comes up. Now what may happen is that backwards compatibility from Windows itself breaks, and they've already introduced that in Windows 10 x64 which requires the existence of a specific function only processors released in the past 8 years have.

    Then there's the business side too, do you realise that Windows 7 mainstream support has actually ended. We're only getting security updates now. Windows 8.1 ends mainstream support in Jan 2018 which means by the time you can realistically get your hands on Kaby Lake silicon Windows 8.1 will be out of support for anything, not just CPUs. i.e. It's up to the hardware vendors to make sure it works, not up to MS.

    As I said, nothing new here. People just getting excited about words on a blog.

  84. Re:That may be. by Aerokii · · Score: 1

    By all means, organize something. Shit, I'd probably even support you in doing so. Other minorities/ethnic groups aren't really obligated to protest/raise awareness for YOUR issue, but I'm actually pretty sure you'd see a lot of support from them, as St. Patrick's day IS pretty offensive towards Irish folk in a lot of ways.

    And then of course you'd get all the people calling you a lunatic SJW for daring to make them question their actions/behaviors.

  85. Will Cortana put up with other harassment? by anti-disney · · Score: 1

    If someone were to say "Cortana, did you eat lead paint chips when you were a kid?" will she also get offended? This comment isn't derogatory towards her being a woman but the person is inferring that she has a mental disability which is also a form of harassment. If she puts up with this then why? Disability based harassment is just as hurtful as sexual harassment.

  86. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by jgdnavy · · Score: 1

    I started by saying it wasn't as bad as claimed, but for many businesses, unsupported does equal not working for practical purposes. Also, Windows 8.1 mainstream support ends in Jan 2018. Skylake is available now, and they have stated that they will not support it on 8.1 except on specific configurations (going so far as to name specific computer models), and then only until July 2017, changing what I imagine is the most common interpretation of mainstream support. Is it the huge deal that many of the sites are making it out to be? Not likely, but the FUD seems to be largely intentional on their part. The blog I linked was the official Microsoft one, not just a random repost.

  87. Re:Come on, Microsoft by anti-disney · · Score: 1

    Actually men can become the victims of sexual harassment just as much as women but men rarely report it because people like you discount them as abusing the system or accuse them of being a wimp and to just put up with it. Harassment based on a person's disability is also illegal in the workplace but is rarely reported by victims. One reason disability harassment isn't reported is victims feel ashamed while others victims feel that since it isn't harassment based on a sexual manner that human resources will do nothing about their complaint or even side with the harasser.

  88. Re:Feminists Destroy Companies by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    I still don't know what you think is going to happen.

    Skylake has a period of support on Windows 8.1 Do you think either Microsoft or Intel are going to magically make a major change to either product or processor that suddenly will cause a problem? Please remember we're talking CPU support here. It's the one thing no one in the world cares about until a system becomes unbootable. Not even corporate interests. And while we're talking support also remember that Windows 7 formally ended mainstream support before Skylake was released. Not only did the world not end, but in fact no one noticed.

    FUD being intentional? More like the a VP was accidentally given a keyboard and spoke his mind. If we jumped on everything that a MS CEO or VP actually said at some point then the world would have well and truly imploded by now.

    Anyway draw any conclusions you want. But effectively we're already living in a world of "non-support" that has been FUDed. And nothing happened.

  89. Re: Amazing by ferret4 · · Score: 1

    I'd say yours is the bugaboo with sexuality. It's the abuse part of sexual abuse that's the issue, and it starts with verbal abuse. And yeah, sounds like you do have anger problems, and you should find a way to cope with them nonviolently. What if you're, say, on a weeks camping and have no access to an avatar punchbag? You'll be screaming at everyone to "hold me back, I can't be held responsible!"

  90. Re: Amazing by ferret4 · · Score: 1

    Also, have you seen the stats on spousal abuse and violent abuse between men and women? It's not the majority of the population but it's a very large percentage. I absolutely do believe it is normalised behaviour, and I don't see why you would have a problem with Microsoft doing their small part to counter the problem as it develops. Is it so important to you to be able to be rude and obnoxious to your feminine-voiced phone that you'd deny the opportunity in mitigating violent and anti-social behaviour in others? Are you really that selfish? Or do you need your phone as a verbal punching bag against all those women who upset you so much?