Black history month

[mids]

Why don't the complainers invent better machines and algorithms?

[Minge är en jävla besserwisser]

It's the left. They don't do anything. They just like to moan. Actually doing something risks exposing themselves as the clowns they know they are. Best to stand on the sidelines and jeer.

[Repat Van]

Oct 8, 2020 7:50:38 GMT Minge är en jävla besserwisser said:

Here's some more sh*t:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54349538

UK passport photo checker shows bias against dark-skinned women

Women with darker skin are more than twice as likely to be told their photos fail UK passport rules when they submit them online than lighter-skinned men, according to a BBC investigation.

One black student said she was wrongly told her mouth looked open each time she uploaded five different photos to the government website.

This shows how "systemic racism" can spread, Elaine Owusu said.


Systematic racism, my ar*e.

I've got a black dog. She's really difficult to photograph. I used to have a white dog. She was much easier.


"This just adds to the increasing pile of products that aren't built for people of colour and especially darker-skinned women," said Inioluwa Deborah Raji, a Mozilla Fellow and researcher with the Algorithmic Justice League.

Anyway if someone from the algorithmic justice league thinks its racist it must be

“ I've got a black dog. She's really difficult to photograph. I used to have a white dog. She was much easier.”

Dogs aren’t people. But anyway surely that’s not true. It’s to do with the photographer and how good they are setting the right exposure.

Anyway it has long been known that facial recognition technology used in security technology is shitter for dark eyes / skin. Which is funny when you consider a minority of the world populations will have both light eyes and light skin.

[perrykneeham]

Oct 7, 2020 21:01:45 GMT Repat Van said:

Oct 7, 2020 17:09:39 GMT perrykneeham said:

Bloody hell, where do Labour drag these morons up from?

order-order.com/2020/10/07/claudia-webbe-britain-is-as-bad-as-iran/

And why?

Is this not accurate?

“ “Supporting militia and terrorist groups around the world to either attack their host countries or Western interests, including the United Kingdom’s.”

Of whom?

[perrykneeham]

Oct 7, 2020 21:01:45 GMT Repat Van said:

Oct 7, 2020 17:09:39 GMT perrykneeham said:

Bloody hell, where do Labour drag these morons up from?

order-order.com/2020/10/07/claudia-webbe-britain-is-as-bad-as-iran/

And why?

Is this not accurate?

“ “Supporting militia and terrorist groups around the world to either attack their host countries or Western interests, including the United Kingdom’s.”

Depends what you mean by "oar".

[Minge är en jävla besserwisser]

Oct 8, 2020 8:09:30 GMT Repat Van said:

Oct 8, 2020 7:50:38 GMT Minge är en jävla besserwisser said:

Here's some more sh*t:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54349538

UK passport photo checker shows bias against dark-skinned women

Women with darker skin are more than twice as likely to be told their photos fail UK passport rules when they submit them online than lighter-skinned men, according to a BBC investigation.

One black student said she was wrongly told her mouth looked open each time she uploaded five different photos to the government website.

This shows how "systemic racism" can spread, Elaine Owusu said.


Systematic racism, my ar*e.

I've got a black dog. She's really difficult to photograph. I used to have a white dog. She was much easier.


"This just adds to the increasing pile of products that aren't built for people of colour and especially darker-skinned women," said Inioluwa Deborah Raji, a Mozilla Fellow and researcher with the Algorithmic Justice League.

Anyway if someone from the algorithmic justice league thinks its racist it must be

“ I've got a black dog. She's really difficult to photograph. I used to have a white dog. She was much easier.”

Dogs aren’t people. But anyway surely that’s not true. It’s to do with the photographer and how good they are setting the right exposure.

Anyway it has long been known that facial recognition technology used in security technology is shitter for dark eyes / skin. Which is funny when you consider a minority of the world populations will have both light eyes and light skin.

Why would i make it up?

Anyway here you go:

iheartdogs.com/extraordinary-pictures-created-to-dispel-the-black-dog-myth/

[wetkingcanute]

He shoots - he scores!!!!

[wetkingcanute]

As it's Black History Month this is for van.

No cows but go to 1:32 mins

[Repat Van]

Oct 8, 2020 8:49:36 GMT Minge är en jävla besserwisser said:

Oct 8, 2020 8:09:30 GMT Repat Van said:

“ I've got a black dog. She's really difficult to photograph. I used to have a white dog. She was much easier.”

Dogs aren’t people. But anyway surely that’s not true. It’s to do with the photographer and how good they are setting the right exposure.

Anyway it has long been known that facial recognition technology used in security technology is shitter for dark eyes / skin. Which is funny when you consider a minority of the world populations will have both light eyes and light skin.

Why would i make it up?

Anyway here you go:

iheartdogs.com/extraordinary-pictures-created-to-dispel-the-black-dog-myth/

Err this is what I said:

"One was the challenge of photographing a difficult subject in my small studio–I would have to make sure that I had all the lighting right and placed to light my subject but not the backdrop,” he says. “The second was the chance to show how beautiful black dogs can be and that it’s not impossible to get great photos with the right lighting.”

Although what I said first was - dogs aren't people.

[Minge är en jävla besserwisser]

Err,This is what you said.

Surely that's not true.

In reply to me saying

“ I've got a black dog. She's really difficult to photograph. I used to have a white dog. She was much easier.”

[Repat Van]

Oct 8, 2020 9:46:03 GMT Minge är en jävla besserwisser said:

Err,This is what you said.

Surely that's not true.

In reply to me saying

“ I've got a black dog. She's really difficult to photograph. I used to have a white dog. She was much easier.”

Dogs aren’t people. But anyway surely that’s not true. It’s to do with the photographer and how good they are setting the right exposure.

Ultimately how well they photograph is down to the photographer. But to reiterate my first point - dogs aren't people?

[Minge är en jävla besserwisser]

Yes, the photographer has to be more skilled. yes. That means it's more difficult.

Good grief.

[Repat Van]

Oct 8, 2020 9:53:27 GMT Minge är en jävla besserwisser said:

Yes, the photographer has to be more skilled. yes. That means it's more difficult.

Good grief.

I didn't say "more skilled" - just that it's to do with the photographer. But yes it does seem that a poor photographer will struggle to photograph black dogs.

I still don't get what that has to do with people.

Edit: Scratch that - I got bored and did not read the article fully. It answers my question - the dog comparison has nothing to do with people:

Computers could now pick up patterns in these images and search for faces in them, but they needed to be fed lots of images of faces to "teach" them what to search for.

This means the accuracy of face detection systems partly depends on the diversity of the data they were trained on.

So a training dataset with less representation of women and people of colour will produce a system that doesn't work well for those groups.

Face-recognition systems need to be tested for fair performance across different communities, but there are other areas of concern too.

[Repat Van]

Those photos however have now made me want a dog - if I could only find somebody to look after it for me.

[mids]

Rodders.

"There are two striking things about the new book, 100 Great Black Britons, which was compiled to celebrate the achievements of British people from an African or Caribbean heritage. The first is the sheer number of people included who are ghastly or mediocre or both. The second is the number of truly brilliant black Britons who were left off the list — for reasons which are not, I think, terribly mysterious.

Under the ‘both’ category we have, to name but a few, Diane Abbott, David Lammy and the reliably hilarious Dawn Butler. There is also Kehinde Andrews, of course, a lecturer at a former polytechnic who will be appearing on a TV programme in your front room very soon opining about how everything in the universe, from hydrogen to oganesson, is racist. That man of limitless talent, Stormzy, makes the cut, as does Valerie Amos.

But, as has been pointed out by the black writer Tomiwa Owolade, while there are black authors on the list, there is no room for Zadie Smith — today probably the most (rightly) renowned of them all. Does Zadie not quite match up to the brilliance of the transgender model Munroe Bergdorf? The next chairman of the BBC — with any luck — Trevor Phillips is missing. Brave, acute and witty, Phillips was also a pioneer of black involvement in public life.

But then there’s no room for Trevor McDonald either; still less the brilliant black educationalists Katharine Birbalsingh and Tony Sewell. The latter has elevated countless inner city black kids into Russell Group universities through his charity Generating Genius and also served as education adviser to Boris Johnson when he was mayor of London. And that perhaps nudges us towards an answer — except to say that, incredibly, Raheem Sterling, easily the best footballer to emerge from this country in the past 25 years, is not on the list. No footballers are.

The argument, I suppose, is that while Zadie Smith, Trevor Phillips, Tony Sewell et al might look a bit black, they are not objectively black. In other words, they do not reflexively swallow the resentment agenda: they are a little more nuanced than that. Smith, for example, has spoken eloquently about the ‘pain’ of some identitarian politics and the absurdity of those who accuse writers of cultural appropriation. Sewell is a social conservative who values the traditional family as well as such utterly outré concepts as hard work and discipline, which is how he got those kids into good universities. Katharine Birbalsingh is of a similar mindset and even goes so far as to describe herself as a ‘small “c” conservative’.

And then there’s Trevor Phillips. Not only does he take the Murdoch shilling, thus aligning himself with the oppressor, he also seems to delight in dissing some of the more facile gripes emanating from the resentment lobby. A lobby which is, you have to say, both powerful and lucrative for those who are part of it.

In not quite toeing the line, then, these truly great black Britons surrender entirely their blackness. They are not really black at all; the blackness you see is merely a subtle trick of the light, a mirage or a chimera. To be truly black is not about skin colour, then, it is about one’s propensity to gripe and blame. This was made explicit in the case of Trevor Phillips by one of those lucky people who were actually chosen as a Great Black Briton — the repulsive Kehinde Andrews. He accused Phillips of ‘coonery’ — being a black person who exists merely for the amusement of white folk. There are plenty of other horrible epithets dreamed up by this professionally embittered contingent to condemn those who do not share their views.

Perhaps Phillips will be able to console himself that while he may not be a ‘great’ black Briton, he might just be the first black person to become chairman of the BBC. He would be an excellent appointment for three main reasons. First, he would be the first chairman with direct and considerable experience of the medium he was overseeing, as a documentary-maker, broadcaster and former producer. Second, while the BBC has made great strides towards diversity by the simple means of dropping into every single programme a black face, regardless of how appropriate it might be, the corporation is still run by white, middle-class public school boys and girls. Diversity is vital to the BBC except in the areas where it really matters, where decisions are made, a point which has been made before by the former head of BBC Westminster, Samir Shah.

Third, the BBC’s cringing appropriation of wokeness grates with its core audience and, I think, would grate with Phillips too. He is not a Conservative, but he does have a certain handle on those vexed cultural issues which includes an acceptance that there are complexities which the bovine liberal left is often incapable of understanding, or deliberately misunderstands. Paul Dacre at Ofcom, Phillips at the BBC. Changing cultural paradigms is not easy: it is rather like trying to turn a supertanker 180 degrees in choppy waters — cumbersome and seemingly lasting an eternity. But Dacre and Phillips would be a good start.

Why were there no footballers on that list of Great Black Britons? No room for the aforementioned Raheem Sterling, or for Viv Anderson (first black player to play for England) or the mercurial John Barnes? I suspect the answer is partly down to snobbery, plus the fact that football — a working-class sport — was light years ahead of the middle-class professions in welcoming black participants, regardless of the racist abuse many received in the early years. In football, the struggle for equality was won years ago, which is why they don’t like to mention it."

www.spectator.co.uk/article/whos-missing-from-that-list-of-great-black-britons

[flatandy]

I don't know who's on the list, but Rodders might have a point about Zadie Smith and Raheem Sterling. Both are actually genuinely in the top echelon of their field regardless of their blackness. I feel like a lot of the other people mentioned - both included and excluded - seem to be people noted for being black, and it's unusual for black people to be in their job. Abbott, for example, might be a target for a lot of desperately humourless racist jokes, but she's not actually brilliant. She's just a kind of OK MP, like so many others. It's like if John Redwood were black, he'd probably end up on this list even though obviously be undeserving.

John Barnes and Viv Anderson are interesting cases. Anderson probably more deserving, because he actually broke down the barriers, so although notable for being an early black man in his field, he actually made a difference. Barnes, I think, was often overrated and dined out for a long time on a goal scored in a friendly against Brazil. Not particularly great, nor revolutionary, just an OK wide-midfielder for England - like describing Chris Waddle or Trevor Steven as "Great Britons".

[jimboky]

100 Great Black Britons,




don't understand why the blacks wish to be referred to as black first,,,, Black Britons, Black Americans,,,, I consider myself as a American with mostly Irish ancestors, wife is American with mostly British ancestors, I would think the Blacks would refer to them selves as Americans with Black ancestors, or British ancestors

[Repat Van]

Oct 8, 2020 14:22:46 GMT jimboky said:

100 Great Black Britons,




don't understand why the blacks wish to be referred to as black first,,,, Black Britons, Black Americans,,,, I consider myself as a American with mostly Irish ancestors, wife is American with mostly British ancestors, I would think the Blacks would refer to them selves as Americans with Black ancestors, or British ancestors

As an American it’s surprising you think “hyphen” identities are weird.

Irish-American / Italian- American / Asian-American etc.

Also using a hyphen for a poll or to fill in a form does not actually mean that is how somebody refers to them self on a day to day business. But I am not surprised you are unaware of that.

[Repat Van]

Oct 8, 2020 12:33:13 GMT mids said:

Rodders.

"There are two striking things about the new book, 100 Great Black Britons, which was compiled to celebrate the achievements of British people from an African or Caribbean heritage. The first is the sheer number of people included who are ghastly or mediocre or both. The second is the number of truly brilliant black Britons who were left off the list — for reasons which are not, I think, terribly mysterious.

Under the ‘both’ category we have, to name but a few, Diane Abbott, David Lammy and the reliably hilarious Dawn Butler. There is also Kehinde Andrews, of course, a lecturer at a former polytechnic who will be appearing on a TV programme in your front room very soon opining about how everything in the universe, from hydrogen to oganesson, is racist. That man of limitless talent, Stormzy, makes the cut, as does Valerie Amos.

But, as has been pointed out by the black writer Tomiwa Owolade, while there are black authors on the list, there is no room for Zadie Smith — today probably the most (rightly) renowned of them all. Does Zadie not quite match up to the brilliance of the transgender model Munroe Bergdorf? The next chairman of the BBC — with any luck — Trevor Phillips is missing. Brave, acute and witty, Phillips was also a pioneer of black involvement in public life.

But then there’s no room for Trevor McDonald either; still less the brilliant black educationalists Katharine Birbalsingh and Tony Sewell. The latter has elevated countless inner city black kids into Russell Group universities through his charity Generating Genius and also served as education adviser to Boris Johnson when he was mayor of London. And that perhaps nudges us towards an answer — except to say that, incredibly, Raheem Sterling, easily the best footballer to emerge from this country in the past 25 years, is not on the list. No footballers are.

The argument, I suppose, is that while Zadie Smith, Trevor Phillips, Tony Sewell et al might look a bit black, they are not objectively black. In other words, they do not reflexively swallow the resentment agenda: they are a little more nuanced than that. Smith, for example, has spoken eloquently about the ‘pain’ of some identitarian politics and the absurdity of those who accuse writers of cultural appropriation. Sewell is a social conservative who values the traditional family as well as such utterly outré concepts as hard work and discipline, which is how he got those kids into good universities. Katharine Birbalsingh is of a similar mindset and even goes so far as to describe herself as a ‘small “c” conservative’.

And then there’s Trevor Phillips. Not only does he take the Murdoch shilling, thus aligning himself with the oppressor, he also seems to delight in dissing some of the more facile gripes emanating from the resentment lobby. A lobby which is, you have to say, both powerful and lucrative for those who are part of it.

In not quite toeing the line, then, these truly great black Britons surrender entirely their blackness. They are not really black at all; the blackness you see is merely a subtle trick of the light, a mirage or a chimera. To be truly black is not about skin colour, then, it is about one’s propensity to gripe and blame. This was made explicit in the case of Trevor Phillips by one of those lucky people who were actually chosen as a Great Black Briton — the repulsive Kehinde Andrews. He accused Phillips of ‘coonery’ — being a black person who exists merely for the amusement of white folk. There are plenty of other horrible epithets dreamed up by this professionally embittered contingent to condemn those who do not share their views.

Perhaps Phillips will be able to console himself that while he may not be a ‘great’ black Briton, he might just be the first black person to become chairman of the BBC. He would be an excellent appointment for three main reasons. First, he would be the first chairman with direct and considerable experience of the medium he was overseeing, as a documentary-maker, broadcaster and former producer. Second, while the BBC has made great strides towards diversity by the simple means of dropping into every single programme a black face, regardless of how appropriate it might be, the corporation is still run by white, middle-class public school boys and girls. Diversity is vital to the BBC except in the areas where it really matters, where decisions are made, a point which has been made before by the former head of BBC Westminster, Samir Shah.

Third, the BBC’s cringing appropriation of wokeness grates with its core audience and, I think, would grate with Phillips too. He is not a Conservative, but he does have a certain handle on those vexed cultural issues which includes an acceptance that there are complexities which the bovine liberal left is often incapable of understanding, or deliberately misunderstands. Paul Dacre at Ofcom, Phillips at the BBC. Changing cultural paradigms is not easy: it is rather like trying to turn a supertanker 180 degrees in choppy waters — cumbersome and seemingly lasting an eternity. But Dacre and Phillips would be a good start.

Why were there no footballers on that list of Great Black Britons? No room for the aforementioned Raheem Sterling, or for Viv Anderson (first black player to play for England) or the mercurial John Barnes? I suspect the answer is partly down to snobbery, plus the fact that football — a working-class sport — was light years ahead of the middle-class professions in welcoming black participants, regardless of the racist abuse many received in the early years. In football, the struggle for equality was won years ago, which is why they don’t like to mention it."

www.spectator.co.uk/article/whos-missing-from-that-list-of-great-black-britons

Rodders is confusing “people who I personally am not impressed by” with “people who do not merit to be on the list”.

There really is no reason to object to Stormzy’s inclusion. And argue in favour of Zadie Smith. You don’t have to like Stormzy’s music to acknowledge his achievements and popularity (which I find easy to do.) It’s like people who complain Beyonce should not get the recognition she does or get Netflix specials because they don’t think her music is any good. His point on Stormzy is even more bizarre given that the point he praises Sewell for (working to get more young black people into universities) is exactly what Stormzy has done too through his scholarship scheme.

That said it’s good to see that some things about the UK never change - Rod Liddle’s obsession with black people being one.

[Repat Van]

“The second is the number of truly brilliant black Britons who were left off the list — for reasons which are not, I think, terribly mysterious....”


“ The argument, I suppose, is that while Zadie Smith, Trevor Phillips, Tony Sewell et al might look a bit black, they are not objectively black. In other words, they do not reflexively swallow the resentment agenda: they are a little more nuanced than that.”


Sigh.

If Rod Liddle set aside his obsession and his knee jerk reaction and actually looked into it his questions would quickly be answered - it appears it was the results of a poll. I don’t think you can control who people select. And it maybe the people who Rod thinks should be more greatly recognised just are not on the radar (for many reasons) of the people who took part in the poll. It’s perfectly possible that Viv Anderson / Katherine Birbalsingh etc are not on the list because those taking part had never heard of them.