Racist Soap Dispenser!

[Starbuck1975]

It sounds like you are suggesting diversity programs focus on recruiting different types of white guys.

Interesting approach...

I am saying there are multiple dimensions to diversity.

 

[HomerJS]

That soap dispenser is a metaphor for the inherent racism that exists in the US today.

 

[realibrad]

That soap dispenser is a metaphor for the inherent racism that exists in the US today.

No it's not. What we have here is a limitation of technology. Racism is not a limitation of anything other than human ignorance.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

So what's the technical reason this is happening? I assume this device uses infrared laser to detect a hand...is infrared absorbed by dark colors? If so, then how have other devices overcome this issue? I have never in my life heard of this being a problem before. Someone in QA massively screwed this up.

 

[HomerJS]

No it's not. What we have here is a limitation of technology. Racism is not a limitation of anything other than human ignorance.

The failure to include people of color in the testing is what I'm talking about. Inherent does not always mean intentional

 

[realibrad]

The failure to include people of color in the testing is what I'm talking about. Inherent does not always mean intentional

So, are you saying this does not work for all black people, or only some black people? Are you sure that we dont have a faulty sensor or some other hardware issue? Or, is it possible that the soap dispenser is cheap and is using a sensor that is cheap that has less range to pick up reflected light?

These sensors work on light reflection. That means that black people having darker skin absorb more light and thus less is reflected back. This is not an issue of hardware being configured for white or black. This is an issue of not enough light getting reflected back because darker skin (black or otherwise) reflects less light/data back to the sensor. A more sensitive sensor would likely be more expensive.

So, this is just a case of cheap hardware coupled with the attributes of having darker skin. You could include people of color and pass testing. What you are saying is include people that are toward the extreme in terms of skin pigment. But, its a matter of being cheap and using cheap hardware, not racism.


Think of this example. Laser hair removal works by using light to heat up hair that is darker than the surrounding skin. People that have blond hair cannot get laser hair removal. People with very dark skin cannot get laser hair removal. Is laser hair removal racist and biased against blond people and dark skin people?

The answer is no. Its a limitation of the method and technology. Should we do away with sensors and technology because it fails to work for some people, or, accept the flaws and try to use multiple methods/hardware to accommodate people?

 

[realibrad]

So what's the technical reason this is happening? I assume this device uses infrared laser to detect a hand...is infrared absorbed by dark colors? If so, then how have other devices overcome this issue? I have never in my life heard of this being a problem before. Someone in QA massively screwed this up.

The way you overcome this is by having more sensitive sensors. As you would imagine, sensors that are more sensitive cost more. The sensor used may have been tested in conditions that were more optimal. Such as testing a GPU in a room that is well colder than a standard room to make it seem like it has better thermals. Many of these sensors are testing in better lighting as well as making sure the hardware is running perfectly.

 

[Perknose]

So, are you saying . . .

[...]

Should we do away with sensors and technology. . .

You miss the point by a country mile. Jesus Christ are you ever DENSE. I really wonder who reminds you to breathe.

 

[realibrad]

You miss the point by a country mile. Jesus Christ are you ever DENSE. I really wonder who reminds you to breathe.

How about you explain what I got wrong? Its very big of you to tell me I'm wrong, but, I wonder what your point is and what you hope to accomplish. It seems pointless to say someone is wrong and not explain why.

 

[Perknose]

How about you explain what I got wrong? Its very big of you to tell me I'm wrong, but, I wonder what your point is and what you hope to accomplish. It seems pointless to say someone is wrong and not explain why.

You are not unintelligent, but all too often you are, imho, too damn dense for words. Sorry, but engaging you in such situations is a recipe for frustration for me.

 

[Greenman]

You miss the point by a country mile. Jesus Christ are you ever DENSE. I really wonder who reminds you to breathe.

He didn't miss the point, he just used a different set of assumptions. His logic came from an engineering prospective, color only enters the equation if it effects the system design.
Anyone can easily follow this train of logic and see where the failure occurred, identify the the components that need attention, and correct the testing procedure.
When viewed as an act of unintended racism, the solution would be diversity training, and the soap dispenser still wouldn't work.
We need to be sensitive to the needs of others, and as accommodating and kind as is reasonable, but along with that has to be the understanding that sometimes shit just happens.

 

[realibrad]

You are not unintelligent, but all too often you are, imho, too damn dense for words. Sorry, but engaging you in such situations is a recipe for frustration for me.

Then why talk to me at all? If I'm too dense for works, then you hoped to accomplish nothing. It makes your actions seem strange. That is, unless you are lying and had a motive but can't or wont express it. My guess is that you have nothing other than a motivation to disagree with me. Sack up and explain yourself, its not that hard.

 

[realibrad]

He didn't miss the point, he just used a different set of assumptions. His logic came from an engineering prospective, color only enters the equation if it effects the system design.
Anyone can easily follow this train of logic and see where the failure occurred, identify the the components that need attention, and correct the testing procedure.
When viewed as an act of unintended racism, the solution would be diversity training, and the soap dispenser still wouldn't work.
We need to be sensitive to the needs of others, and as accommodating and kind as is reasonable, but along with that has to be the understanding that sometimes shit just happens.

Your presumption is that I'm not a biased and or racist person. I believe that is his problem when trying to understand me.

 

[paperfist]

I hate those and the faucets with the sensors. If you wear a dark shirt it's like being in the desert trying to find water.

 

[Starbuck1975]

The failure to include people of color in the testing is what I'm talking about. Inherent does not always mean intentional

That doesn’t necessarily indicate inherent racism. Products go through revisions, enhancements and refinements to improve performance all the time.

 

[HomerJS]

So, are you saying this does not work for all black people, or only some black people? Are you sure that we dont have a faulty sensor or some other hardware issue? Or, is it possible that the soap dispenser is cheap and is using a sensor that is cheap that has less range to pick up reflected light?

These sensors work on light reflection. That means that black people having darker skin absorb more light and thus less is reflected back. This is not an issue of hardware being configured for white or black. This is an issue of not enough light getting reflected back because darker skin (black or otherwise) reflects less light/data back to the sensor. A more sensitive sensor would likely be more expensive.

So, this is just a case of cheap hardware coupled with the attributes of having darker skin. You could include people of color and pass testing. What you are saying is include people that are toward the extreme in terms of skin pigment. But, its a matter of being cheap and using cheap hardware, not racism.


Think of this example. Laser hair removal works by using light to heat up hair that is darker than the surrounding skin. People that have blond hair cannot get laser hair removal. People with very dark skin cannot get laser hair removal. Is laser hair removal racist and biased against blond people and dark skin people?

The answer is no. Its a limitation of the method and technology. Should we do away with sensors and technology because it fails to work for some people, or, accept the flaws and try to use multiple methods/hardware to accommodate people?

Everything you said may be true but would have been discovered if people of color were included in the testing. Again, that's what I'm talking about. Technology is just a metaphor.

 

[Perknose]

Everything you said may be true but would have been discovered if people of color were included in the testing. Again, that's what I'm talking about. Technology is just a metaphor.

The point of the article is this simple, folks.

 

[realibrad]

Everything you said may be true but would have been discovered if people of color were included in the testing. Again, that's what I'm talking about. Technology is just a metaphor.

It very well may have been discovered, but again, if the device is being used outside of spec conditions, its not racist. If there is a hardware malfunction in this device, its not racist. We are running up against physics, and that is it. Darker skin reflects less light.

Also, why did you not answer a single question I asked?

 

[realibrad]

The point of the article is this simple, folks.

Go away little boy. If you cant have a discussion, you look like a twit.

 

[Jaskalas]

The point of the article is this simple, folks.

I think what you've run into is the consequence of brow beating people for their ancestor's crimes, for their current "privilege". The Ego can create a rather potent, hostile, and singularly focused defense mechanism that actually shuts down empathy or simple understanding on that issue. It triggers a modest version of fight or flight, and in this case all such references to racism must be fought. To prove one's worth. To stroke the Ego.

It a malignant strain of defensive reflex that has been trained into people. A barrier most difficult to cross.

 

[HomerJS]

It very well may have been discovered, but again, if the device is being used outside of spec conditions, its not racist. If there is a hardware malfunction in this device, its not racist. We are running up against physics, and that is it. Darker skin reflects less light.

Also, why did you not answer a single question I asked?

Oh come on dude. No one thinks a sensor on a soap dispenser is "literally racist". I made a comment finding the clip funny.

You also missed the point where I ceded on your technology comments.

The racism was inherent by human beings in testing, thereby making the soap dispenser appear racist. Again I don't think it was intentional but only considering people like yourself produced this clip.

Key word "inherent"

 

[realibrad]

Oh come on dude. No one thinks a sensor on a soap dispenser is "literally racist". I made a comment finding the clip funny.

You also missed the point where I ceded on your technology comments.

The racism was inherent by human beings in testing, thereby making the soap dispenser appear racist. Again I don't think it was intentional but only considering people like yourself produced this clip.

Key word "inherent"

No, it's still not racist. Again, the way the technology works means darker skin will run into issues given sub optimal conditions. Products are not expected to work in all conditions. Testing is never done for every possible situation. That would be an infinite number things to test.

The issue here is not likely inherent racial anything.

 

[Moonbeam]

No, it's still not racist. Again, the way the technology works means darker skin will run into issues given sub optimal conditions. Products are not expected to work in all conditions. Testing is never done for every possible situation. That would be an infinite number things to test.

The issue here is not likely inherent racial anything.

Really? Why isn't it that you are just another product created by white culture that defectively measures the racism in a society based on white pin head engineering logic? I think it is just as likely that your racism detector is defective. Has it ever occurred to you that if you are not black you have no idea how much racism you will see that goes unnoticed by others? Why would I care what you think to be likely? Your thinking appears to me to to favor linear over holistic.

 

[HomerJS]

No, it's still not racist. Again, the way the technology works means darker skin will run into issues given sub optimal conditions. Products are not expected to work in all conditions. Testing is never done for every possible situation. That would be an infinite number things to test.

The issue here is not likely inherent racial anything.

If they didn't think of testing with dark skin it is inherently racist. Even if unintentional which I think it was.

If they tested with dark skin and knew it didn't work just release it with a sign "may not work with black people" and call it a day

When I was in school we were taught "Columbus discovered America" At the time it never dawned on me that phrase discount Native Americans as people. Again at the time I didn't know.

 

[Jaskalas]

When I was in school we were taught "Columbus discovered America" At the time it never dawned on me that phrase discount Native Americans as people. Again at the time I didn't know.

Depends on the concept of discovery. To be an isolated and tribal people who never returned to tell the rest of the world of the discovery meant that it was still there for the rest of us to discover. Only this time, we had language and a developed civilization where we could impart that knowledge onto others. Thus, for the world, the discovery was made.

It works either way. Yes, finding it first counts. But for society to discover it... that too means something.