Hacker News Reader

Comment by mc32 | Hacker News Reader

You know, on the one hand, yes, they need direction. On the other hand these kinds of people are by definition leaches. Their existence hinges on this thing being an issue. So I can't feel bad for them.

Now, I can see them as a volunteer advisory group. That I'm for. But I loathe seeing all kinds of "industries" pop up that are essentially leaching from businesses. Most "training" kinds of curricula and outside experts take this form, from safety training, to AI ethics to social responsibility, etc., etc. They are there to line their own pockets and the longer they can prolong the issue the better. Oh, safety has not improved, you need to hire me again! Oh, you can't hire enough women, you need to hire me again!

View on HN

If a warehouse worker is going to operate a forklift then they need training to do so safely. Those trainers aren't leeches. Out in the real world beyond the software industry there are serious safety risks all over.

The solution is often making it impossible for people to commit mistakes. Just like you can't "accidentally" launch an ICBM.

I admit some of these may be difficult to accomplish with training protocol, but often these firms that come in and advise on how to be "safer" are just pounding harder. You know what, making someone glaze over a checklist isn't going to make them be safer. It takes the right personality and attention to detail that some people just lack.

Please explain how your make it "impossible" to run over a co-worker with a forklift. Have you ever worked in a warehouse?

Checklists have been proven to improve safety in many environments. They aren't a panacea and some workers will inevitably ignore them, but they do help.

We're getting a bit off the rails here. My point is a lot of these cottage industries that pop up to address whatever the current zeitgeist is in the workplace is 90% useless and the time (money could be better spent).

You could re-design warehouses. Add sensors so that proximity activates a power kill switch, etc. But this is not the main thrust. The main one is most of these expert advisors are closer to extortionists than problem solvers.

I will believe them and take them seriously when they volunteer their commitment to improve things. People go to those time management trainings and the same wasteful meetings continue but with some added nonsense twist. Harassments training but managers still can't keep their hands to themselves. SOX and people still misappropriate funds. Group collaborations with some idiotic legos exercise and people still protect their silos.

I would go as far as impossible, but those proximity sensors cars use work pretty well.

*wouldn't go

[I don't know if there's something about HN or how people are using it, but these typos that make sentences have the opposite meaning seem far more frequent here than what I'd expect. I probably am biased towards noticing.]

How do you feel about maintenance programmers, doctors, and car mechanics?

Absolutely not the same thing.

I personally love them; because when something is broken according to my standards, I ask them to fix it and they try !

"Ethics guys" insist of fixing stuff when it's broken according to their standards, even if I don't want/need them to.

Imagine being so triggered by any societal protective mechanism that you classify an IN-HOUSE team about ethical use of some technology as "leeches".

I really, really have got to stop coming here.

> Oh, you can't hire enough women, you need to hire me again!

There it is. You didn't need to blow the dog whistle, we all got it. Keep on keepin' on ignoring the ever present boys' club and widespread reports that diversified teams produce better results. Surely that's relevant to a discussion about... an internal AI ethics team. Yup.

> Keep on keepin' on ignoring the ever present boys' club and widespread reports that diversified teams produce better results

The amazing thing with these results is that you should thus not have the need to create any rules and regulation to impose diversity !

Companies that read and don't ignore these reports should automatically gain a competitive advantage by applying their teaching and creating diversified teams that will produce better results, and beat their backwards thinking competitors.

It would also imply that undiverse teams in Japan, China, Korea, Taiwan, etc., should be collapsing and unable to figure out tough problems due to their multifaceted lack of diversity in multiple axes. However, in many cases, they're beating our pants off.

What is closer to the truth is what the ex-chief of diversity at Apple said once, that got her fired when she pretty naturally, and I would say, uncontroversially said: "There can be 12 white, blue-eyed, blond men in a room and they’re going to be diverse too because they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation,” the inaugural diversity chief said.

“Diversity is the human experience,” she said, according to Quartz. “I get a little bit frustrated when diversity or the term diversity is tagged to the people of color, or the women, or the LGBT.”"

Distilled, the diversity that gives you an edge is the diversity in thought, not the the diversity in outward appearance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com