I find it really interesting that they cover on the real reason most AI's are female, but then brush it off and do not actually go into it. Those studies have found that a female persona is more...
Studies show that users anthropomorphise virtual agents — relating to them as human — and are more receptive to them if they are empathetic and female.
I find it really interesting that they cover on the real reason most AI's are female, but then brush it off and do not actually go into it. Those studies have found that a female persona is more approachable and that is the main reason female personas are used. Most people (including myself as an Alexa user) would not relate to a male voice or artificial gender neutral voice as well as we do a neutral female voice. The current tasks the units are limited to doing are meinial because of the limits of the technology, not because we are somehow putting them down.
Personally, I think this conversation is coming a little prematurely in the development of the technology. Right now, in reality, they are not true AI. They are complex programs that mimic AI well, but as a regular Alexa user (she runs basically everything in my living room from lights to TV to heat) I can tell you right now the program behind our digital assistants have a very long way to go. Until we actually make the breakthrough and have a true (or at least truer) digital AI I think assigning them rights is just further anthropomorphising a computer program.
And even then, you get into the topic of whether or not bots and AI should even have rights in the first place.
You quoted part of the article, but missed an important bit just after it: It's not just that we want our pseudo-AIs to be female, it's that we want certain types of pseudo-AIs to be female. If...
You quoted part of the article, but missed an important bit just after it:
But it can depend on what the device is being tasked to do.
If it's role-playing an engineer or lawyer, for example, users prefer their bots to be blokes — reverting to old-fashioned stereotypes.
It's not just that we want our pseudo-AIs to be female, it's that we want certain types of pseudo-AIs to be female. If it's emulating a professional, we want a man's voice, but, if it's emulating an assistant, we want a woman's voice. For the sake of making a point: if we see it as an equal, it should be male; if we see it as a subordinate, it should be female. Women are not seen as equals, they're seen as helpers. That's the inherent sexism.
It's not about assigning rights to AIs (where did you get that from in this article?), it's about us extending our real-world sexism in our digital assistants.
I would be very interested to know what those so called bots are and her sources for that information. Even in the Engineering world every AI I have every encountered are female. When I have...
I would be very interested to know what those so called bots are and her sources for that information. Even in the Engineering world every AI I have every encountered are female. When I have researched the topic in the past every study I read reflected that people preferred female personas in all situations because in general, female personas are just more approachable than male (or gender neutral robotic voices).
I think she is over analyzing it, ignoring the psychology behind it and finding sexism where none exists.
Also, claiming that bots are being abused and harassed implies to me that she thinks they have rights (or should have rights). That subtext was present throughout the article. But I of course, could be reading into that to much.
And why is that? You're accusing these researchers of ignoring psychology, but you're also glossing over it. Why are female personas more approachable than male personas? Someone is approachable...
because in general, female personas are just more approachable than male
And why is that? You're accusing these researchers of ignoring psychology, but you're also glossing over it. Why are female personas more approachable than male personas? Someone is approachable if they're not threatening. Why aren't women perceived as being as threatening as men? Is it because we perceive men as more aggressive, or women as more submissive? Isn't that the definition of sexism: stereotyping each gender with certain characteristics, to the point where it gives us positive and negative perceptions of those genders? This is the psychology you say she's ignoring, and the sexism you say she's inventing.
claiming that bots are being abused and harassed implies to me that she thinks they have rights
No, it's implying that this is how people would treat real women if there weren't social and legal restrictions in place. We can treat bots and other inanimate objects badly without consequences, so we're more likely to express ourselves honestly to them. And, when you put a female voice on a bot, it's more likely to be harassed. This reinforces what women already know: real-world women experience more harassment than real-world men, which is why female-perceived bots experience more harassment than male-perceived bots.
This isn't about the bots, or bots' rights. The bots are merely the lens through which we can detect real-world sexism.
Yes, of course male personas are seen as more aggressive and female personas are seen as submissive. That's kind of literally the point. I do not see that as sexism, that is just genetics. It's...
Yes, of course male personas are seen as more aggressive and female personas are seen as submissive. That's kind of literally the point.
I do not see that as sexism, that is just genetics. It's not a perception, it's just the reality of our evolution as a species. Men are generally more aggressive and predetermined to physical strength. Women are generally more submissive and predetermined to compassion. It's written into our biology and its something modern feminism tends to ignore. It's not a matter of societal norms, it's just who we are as a species. Men have evolved to fight and women have evolved to nurture. You cannot ignore 200,000 years of evolution because of 50 years of societal norms. Men and women might be equals in society, but each have their own strengths that the other does not possess. True equality is not possible and its naive for us to try. We should embrace the strengths each of us have, instead of vilifying them. Because of this, we as a species naturally are more perceptive to one voice over the other.
when you put a female voice on a bot, it's more likely to be harassed.
There is nothing to back that claim up. They are harassed and treated poorly because they are inanimate objects, not because the persona they are putting forward is female in nature. Even then, I doubt that many people who actually use them are actively harassing their personal assistants. Most of that harassment would be coming from people goofing around with the AI, not active users.
This isn't about the bots, or bots' rights. The bots are merely the lens through which we can detect real-world sexism.
Yes and it's certainly an interesting way to look at it. In reality I think its imposing the ideas of sexism on AI in the same way they are already being given anthropomorphic traits. Its just being used as a launching point for the narrative of sexism, not actually a reflection of it, and I think that is an important distinction to be made.
That was google autocorrect being silly, sometimes when I type to fast it I skips letters and it gets confused. I meant anthropomorphic. Thanks, I fixed it.
That was google autocorrect being silly, sometimes when I type to fast it I skips letters and it gets confused.
I see male assistants as “butlers” and female assistants as “secretaries”. Are they not equal in that sense? I just have a preference for the female voice; I wouldn't trust a male voice the same...
I see male assistants as “butlers” and female assistants as “secretaries”. Are they not equal in that sense? I just have a preference for the female voice; I wouldn't trust a male voice the same way. I also think that if I was female I'd prefer a male voice.
Yes, of course they are equal in that way. But the majority of AI assistants are female, because studies have shown more people relate to a neutral, empathetic female voice than they do to a male...
Yes, of course they are equal in that way. But the majority of AI assistants are female, because studies have shown more people relate to a neutral, empathetic female voice than they do to a male voice.
I'm a male and I definitely prefer a male voice. I find them to be calmer --- lower in the high end. The female voices tend to be shrill. If I have to use a female voice, I always go with the...
I'm a male and I definitely prefer a male voice. I find them to be calmer --- lower in the high end. The female voices tend to be shrill. If I have to use a female voice, I always go with the British one... but maybe this speaks to my desire for a Mary Poppins-like presence in my life.
That last one would be quite interesting for combatting sleazy behavior while doing it in a funny, non aggressive way. I'm entirely supportive of that initiative. Actually reminds me of L3-37 from...
Ms Feldman had to design for this possibility in her banking bot, and noticed some AI assistants were quite indulgent of harassment.
"And I wanted to try to do that differently," she says.
"Kai might lightly deflect it and suggest they talk about banking instead … it's not falling over itself to play along with this harassment."
If a user persists, Kai might respond with: "I'm envisioning white sand and a hammock, please try me later!"
That last one would be quite interesting for combatting sleazy behavior while doing it in a funny, non aggressive way. I'm entirely supportive of that initiative. Actually reminds me of L3-37 from Solo: A Star Wars Story, best part of that film.
I have had friends mess with my Alexa (echo) and I have never seen her respond to sleazy comments. Most people's first reaction when encountering an AI for the first time is to ask it odd...
I have had friends mess with my Alexa (echo) and I have never seen her respond to sleazy comments. Most people's first reaction when encountering an AI for the first time is to ask it odd questions and challenge what sort of things it will say. She will flirt a little, but she does it in a polite and dismissive way.
For example;
if you say "Alexa, I love you" she will respond with "That's nice of you to say"
or if you say "Alexa, will you be my girlfriend" she will respond with "I like you, as a friend"
I have never once seen here say something that would be considered;
falling over itself to play along with this harassment.
I have been talking to her and utilizing her as a home assistant for over a year now.
I find it really interesting that they cover on the real reason most AI's are female, but then brush it off and do not actually go into it. Those studies have found that a female persona is more approachable and that is the main reason female personas are used. Most people (including myself as an Alexa user) would not relate to a male voice or artificial gender neutral voice as well as we do a neutral female voice. The current tasks the units are limited to doing are meinial because of the limits of the technology, not because we are somehow putting them down.
Personally, I think this conversation is coming a little prematurely in the development of the technology. Right now, in reality, they are not true AI. They are complex programs that mimic AI well, but as a regular Alexa user (she runs basically everything in my living room from lights to TV to heat) I can tell you right now the program behind our digital assistants have a very long way to go. Until we actually make the breakthrough and have a true (or at least truer) digital AI I think assigning them rights is just further anthropomorphising a computer program.
And even then, you get into the topic of whether or not bots and AI should even have rights in the first place.
You quoted part of the article, but missed an important bit just after it:
It's not just that we want our pseudo-AIs to be female, it's that we want certain types of pseudo-AIs to be female. If it's emulating a professional, we want a man's voice, but, if it's emulating an assistant, we want a woman's voice. For the sake of making a point: if we see it as an equal, it should be male; if we see it as a subordinate, it should be female. Women are not seen as equals, they're seen as helpers. That's the inherent sexism.
It's not about assigning rights to AIs (where did you get that from in this article?), it's about us extending our real-world sexism in our digital assistants.
I would be very interested to know what those so called bots are and her sources for that information. Even in the Engineering world every AI I have every encountered are female. When I have researched the topic in the past every study I read reflected that people preferred female personas in all situations because in general, female personas are just more approachable than male (or gender neutral robotic voices).
I think she is over analyzing it, ignoring the psychology behind it and finding sexism where none exists.
Also, claiming that bots are being abused and harassed implies to me that she thinks they have rights (or should have rights). That subtext was present throughout the article. But I of course, could be reading into that to much.
And why is that? You're accusing these researchers of ignoring psychology, but you're also glossing over it. Why are female personas more approachable than male personas? Someone is approachable if they're not threatening. Why aren't women perceived as being as threatening as men? Is it because we perceive men as more aggressive, or women as more submissive? Isn't that the definition of sexism: stereotyping each gender with certain characteristics, to the point where it gives us positive and negative perceptions of those genders? This is the psychology you say she's ignoring, and the sexism you say she's inventing.
No, it's implying that this is how people would treat real women if there weren't social and legal restrictions in place. We can treat bots and other inanimate objects badly without consequences, so we're more likely to express ourselves honestly to them. And, when you put a female voice on a bot, it's more likely to be harassed. This reinforces what women already know: real-world women experience more harassment than real-world men, which is why female-perceived bots experience more harassment than male-perceived bots.
This isn't about the bots, or bots' rights. The bots are merely the lens through which we can detect real-world sexism.
Yes, of course male personas are seen as more aggressive and female personas are seen as submissive. That's kind of literally the point.
I do not see that as sexism, that is just genetics. It's not a perception, it's just the reality of our evolution as a species. Men are generally more aggressive and predetermined to physical strength. Women are generally more submissive and predetermined to compassion. It's written into our biology and its something modern feminism tends to ignore. It's not a matter of societal norms, it's just who we are as a species. Men have evolved to fight and women have evolved to nurture. You cannot ignore 200,000 years of evolution because of 50 years of societal norms. Men and women might be equals in society, but each have their own strengths that the other does not possess. True equality is not possible and its naive for us to try. We should embrace the strengths each of us have, instead of vilifying them. Because of this, we as a species naturally are more perceptive to one voice over the other.
There is nothing to back that claim up. They are harassed and treated poorly because they are inanimate objects, not because the persona they are putting forward is female in nature. Even then, I doubt that many people who actually use them are actively harassing their personal assistants. Most of that harassment would be coming from people goofing around with the AI, not active users.
Yes and it's certainly an interesting way to look at it. In reality I think its imposing the ideas of sexism on AI in the same way they are already being given anthropomorphic traits. Its just being used as a launching point for the narrative of sexism, not actually a reflection of it, and I think that is an important distinction to be made.
Off-topic, but is this a word you just coined or did you mean anthropomorphic? Funny, because it works either way. I even like it as a new word.
That was google autocorrect being silly, sometimes when I type to fast it I skips letters and it gets confused.
I meant anthropomorphic.
Thanks, I fixed it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFR3lOm_xhE&t=82
I see male assistants as “butlers” and female assistants as “secretaries”. Are they not equal in that sense? I just have a preference for the female voice; I wouldn't trust a male voice the same way. I also think that if I was female I'd prefer a male voice.
Yes, of course they are equal in that way. But the majority of AI assistants are female, because studies have shown more people relate to a neutral, empathetic female voice than they do to a male voice.
I'm a male and I definitely prefer a male voice. I find them to be calmer --- lower in the high end. The female voices tend to be shrill. If I have to use a female voice, I always go with the British one... but maybe this speaks to my desire for a Mary Poppins-like presence in my life.
They do it because people are more responsive to it. It's the same reason that women more often get receptionist jobs than men.
That last one would be quite interesting for combatting sleazy behavior while doing it in a funny, non aggressive way. I'm entirely supportive of that initiative. Actually reminds me of L3-37 from Solo: A Star Wars Story, best part of that film.
I have had friends mess with my Alexa (echo) and I have never seen her respond to sleazy comments. Most people's first reaction when encountering an AI for the first time is to ask it odd questions and challenge what sort of things it will say. She will flirt a little, but she does it in a polite and dismissive way.
For example;
if you say "Alexa, I love you" she will respond with "That's nice of you to say"
or if you say "Alexa, will you be my girlfriend" she will respond with "I like you, as a friend"
I have never once seen here say something that would be considered;
I have been talking to her and utilizing her as a home assistant for over a year now.