Supervised Learning and Unsupervised Learning
triskell.github.io
triskell.github.io
There are a multitude of political opinions out there (which does not mean they are bad ideas), and a large number of people who like to criticize others based on this because they get to feel superior. Such people also think that everything (including the personal) is political and make no distinction between the intentional and unintentional.
It's wise to just ignore them when the criticism is tangential. One only has finite mental bandwidth for these things, there is no way to cover the full combinatorial explosion of things that _could_ be interpreted as offensive.
Hacker News could really benefit from a sister site that focuses on current politics and political issues as a way to draw it away from Hacker News itself.
Honestly, though, that's what 4chan did with /b/ and that seems to work. Though externally most people associate 4chan with /b/, it does free up the other communities on the site to run smoothly, or so I'm told.
Still, judging by most of those comments in here I think people are just eager for an excuse to "call out" someone's missteps. They say it's just a suggestion, or a recommendation, but the implicit warning is there: do what we say or we'll make you hurt. The fear is obvious, given the number of green throwaways people have made just to try to have a rational argument.
I hope that would help people to discover ML and it will attract more people to it. That is the kind of fun article I missed when I started to wonder what is ML.
Some of the response here I think would be avoided if you added a bit of an introduction to your girlfriend (this doesn't need to be identifying), as it seems to be being taken as a general "women don't know X" rather than "my girlfriend didn't know about X so this is how I explained it". This would also help set the scene a bit, who is the audience? Are they very, slightly, just somewhat or not at all technical?
Perhaps some additions that would be good are what are her questions? What's she asking you in response to these things? They have a good chance of being the kind of questions your readers might be asking too, and so having questions and your answers might be a nice thing to see.
I think it was uncharitable for you to assume he was implying anything about girls generally. If it had been "Machine Learning: for your girlfriend," that could have been reasonable to make that assumption over.
Edit: revising, shortening, done~
There's nothing inclusive in your attitude, only anger and blindness to the most obvious, harmless interpretation.
The author decided not to tell us anything about who he taught -- where on that range she fell -- just what her social role was... His.
That's what people are objecting to: in an article about teaching your gf something, why not make it about who she is as a student and what she learned instead of her social status as your mate?
It's that fundamental phrasing and framing of her, as it being more important to know her social status than anything about her academics, that people object to.
(All that aside, this is a silly thing to complain about. But it isn't nothing.)
Edit: I have to redact a little bit, clearly "my girlfried" is possessive and exclusive, I feel slightly offended. I hope this sounds like sarcasm, although it is petty.
Maybe you should stop shoving politics (no matter how well intentioned) into everything.
Just use Occam's razor here. The simplest explanation is that his girlfriend is non-technical. Therefore, the explanation will be simple and approachable to non-experts.
He could have had a long title that said that, or he could have expressed it much more succinctly as he did.
You have to actively read more into it to find a way to be offended by it.
Kind of like ELI5 -- not actually a five year old, but literally taken, it would sound fairly strange.
A criticism of the choice of language used in this article is a very valid criticism to make, and doesn't invalidate the usefulness of the article as a whole. It might just help the author understand how he can improve his future writings!
Persecuting people for not stripping personal accounts of details that happen to match forbidden stereotypes seems rather oppressive. And like something that will tend to de-legitimize the cause you're using to justify said persecution.
When my girlfriend and I pursue things intellectually, we feel sentimental about it to some extent.
I can sympathize with OP for choosing the risk of uncharitable readings
It's also largely possible OP did not anticipate the risk of uncharitable readings, and it was not an informed decision
I can understand both an uninformed and informed decision on the part of OP
Edit: clarify, shorten, extend, extend, done ~
It's obvious the guy that wrote these articles isn't trying to trigger anyone, so can we all just not get triggered?
It seems like a very valid thing to discuss, and suggesting that people might be 'triggered' for even bringing it up only serves to undermine a legitimate discussion on it.
No one here seems emotionally distraught by the author's words. Rather, all of the discussions about the inappropriateness of the remarks seem to be pitched in a constructive and explanatory way, without regard to whether they were offended by them or not.
The ancestor comments by andendau and dopu are admonishing him for it.
>He should change it. Regardless of the intention, this is how it will be interpreted.
Seems more like an advisement than an admonishment. Perhaps I should have said no one is rebuking them for it.
Either way, I don't see this as the 'political correctness police jumping on them'. It's not like people are organizing a lynch mob for the author.
"Elementary school unions explained to my husband"
Would that make you feel like the education community is unwelcoming of all genders?
I know dads feel excluded because a number of educational things specifically mention moms.
I will denounce all such posts. This is not PC, it's stopping bigotry wherever it lives.