标记偏见_我们建立的偏见

标记偏见

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about our biases and their influence on what we build and how. We’re all biased in some way—it’s an inevitable side-effect of living. We experience certain things, we live in a certain environment, we have certain interactions and over time all of these experiences and factors add up to impact the way we view ourselves and the way we view others.

我最近一直在思考我们的偏见及其对我们构建的内容和方式的影响。 我们都有某种偏见-这是生活不可避免的副作用。 我们经历某些事物，我们生活在某种环境中，我们有某种互动，随着时间的流逝，所有这些经历和因素加起来都会影响我们看待自己和他人的方式。

These biases come into play over and over again in our work, and can have devastating consequences.

这些偏见在我们的工作中反复出现，并可能造成毁灭性后果。

There was an interesting post on The Coral Project about anonymity and its impact—or rather, non-impact—on online behavior. A frequent refrain heard when we try to understand why online behavior is so frequently so poor is that the ability to be anonymous is one of the primary reasons for the problem. J. Nathan Matias argues differently, though:

The Coral Project上有一篇有趣的文章，内容涉及匿名及其对在线行为的影响(或更确切地说，是无影响的)。 当我们试图理解为什么在线行为如此频繁如此糟糕的原因时，经常听到人们的克制，就是匿名能力是造成此问题的主要原因之一。 内森·马蒂亚斯 ( J. Nathan Matias)则提出了不同的看法 ：

Not only would removing anonymity fail to consistently improve online community behavior – forcing real names in online communities could also increase discrimination and worsen harassment.

消除匿名不仅不能持续改善在线社区的行为-在在线社区中强迫实名还可能增加歧视并加剧骚扰。

We need to change our entire approach to the question. Our concerns about anonymity are overly-simplistic; system design can’t solve social problems without actual social change.

我们需要改变整个问题的处理方式。 我们对匿名的担忧过于简单化； 没有实际的社会变革，系统设计就无法解决社会问题。

While the article cites a little bit of research questioning our assumptions about anonymity online, the bulk of the article is focused on reframing our perspective of the discussion. We often consider the question of bad behavior online from the perspective of the people misbehaving. What is it that makes them feel free to be so much more vindictive in an online setting? Matias instead builds his case by focusing on the victims of this behavior.

尽管本文引用了一些研究质疑我们对在线匿名性的假设，但本文的大部分内容都集中在重新定义我们对讨论的观点上。 我们经常从人们行为不端的角度来考虑在线不良行为的问题。 是什么让他们在在线环境中更加自由自大？ Matias通过关注这种行为的受害者来构建自己的案例。

Revealing personal information exposes people to greater levels of harassment and discrimination. While there is no conclusive evidence that displaying names and identities will reliably reduce social problems, many studies have documented the problems it creates. When people’s names and photos are shown on a platform, people who provide a service to them – drivers, hosts, buyers – reject transactions from people of color and charge them more. Revealing marital status on DonorsChoose caused donors give less to students with women teachers, in fields where women were a minority. Gender- and race-based harassment are only possible if people know a person’s gender and/or race, and real names often give strong indications around both of these categories. Requiring people to disclose that information forces those risks upon them.

泄露个人信息会使人们遭受更大程度的骚扰和歧视。 尽管没有确凿的证据表明显示姓名和身份可以可靠地减少社会问题，但许多研究已记录了由此产生的问题。 当人们的名字和照片显示在平台上时，向他们提供服务的人们–司机，房东，购买者–拒绝有色人种的交易并向他们收取更多费用。 在捐赠者中揭示婚姻状况选择导致捐赠者在女权少数群体中给女教师的学生捐款减少。 基于性别和种族的骚扰只有在人们了解一个人的性别和/或种族的情况下才有可能，并且真实姓名通常会在这两个类别中都给出强烈的暗示。 要求人们披露信息会给他们带来那些风险。

He also points out that pseudonymity can be an important protective measure for harassment victims:

他还指出，假名可以成为骚扰受害者的重要保护措施：

According to a US nationally-representative report by the Data & Society Institute, 43% of online harassment victims have changed their contact information and 26% disconnected from online networks or devices to protect themselves. When people do withdraw, they are often disconnected from the networks of support they need to survive harassment. Pseudonymity is a common protective measure. One study on the reddit platform found that women, who are more likely to receive harassment, also use multiple pseudonymous identities at greater rates than men.

根据美国数据与社会研究所(Data＆Society Institute)的美国全国代表报告，在线骚扰受害者中有43％更改了联系方式，而有26％断开在线网络或设备以保护自己。 当人们撤离时，他们通常会脱离骚扰所需要的支持网络。 假名是一种常见的保护措施。 关于reddit平台的一项研究发现，更容易受到骚扰的女性也比男性更容易使用多种笔名。

In other words, one thing we can state about removing anonymity is that it increases the risk for people on the receiving end of online harassment.

换句话说，关于消除匿名性，我们可以说的一件事是，它增加了在线骚扰接收端人们的风险。

Removing anonymity online, then, is yet another example of how we reflect our own biases in the decisions we make and the things we build.

那么，在网上消除匿名性是我们如何在决策和所建事物中反映自己的偏见的又一个例子。

It is our biases that lead us to overlook accessibility or how an application performs on a low-powered device or spotty network.

是我们的偏见导致我们忽略了可访问性或应用程序在低功率设备或参差不齐的网络上的性能。

It is our biases that lead us to develop algorithms that struggle to recognize women’s voices or show more high-paying executive jobs to men than women.

正是我们的偏见促使我们开发出一种算法，这些算法难以识别女性的声音或向 女性 展示比女性更多的高薪行政职位 。

And it is our biases that lead us to frame the problem of online behavior from that of the attacker. If we’ve never experienced persistent harassment, and if we don’t stop to talk to those who have, we end up with solutions that are dangerous for the people on the receiving end of that harassment—the ones who need protection the most.

正是我们的偏见导致我们从攻击者的角度来界定在线行为的问题。 如果我们从未经历过持续的骚扰，并且我们不停止与遭受骚扰的人交谈，那么我们最终会得出对骚扰的接受者来说最危险的解决方案，即最需要保护的人们。

In each of these situations, our biases don’t just lead us to build something that is hard to use; they cause us to actively, if unintentionally, exclude entire groups of people.

在每种情况下，我们的偏见不仅会导致我们构建一些难以使用的东西； 它们使我们积极地(如果无意间) 排斥了整个人群。

The new year is just behind us which means this is a time where a lot of people are reflecting on the past year, and on the things they want to improve on in the year to come. There are many worthy goals to pursue. There may be, however, no more important investment we can make in ourselves than to actively seek to broaden our perspective.

新的一年就在我们身后，这意味着很多人正在反思过去的一年，以及他们希望在来年改进的事情。 有许多值得追求的目标。 但是，除了积极寻求扩大我们的视野之外，我们没有比自己更重要的投资了。

翻译自: https://timkadlec.com/2017/01/the-dangers-of-bias/

标记偏见