This topic is always going to be highly subjective, but I find the author's examples of how this feature is malfunctioning to be extremely uncompelling.
"Motherboard" was included in Apple's style guide in 2020 as "don't use" (https://help.apple.com/applestyleguide/#/apsg72b28652). Like it or hate it, this is the direction the industry, of which Google is a part, is moving. I'm sure a publication called Motherboard might have an opinion on this, but neither they nor Google are the final arbiters on the language. The I Have a Dream speech example is pretty anecdotal; King was an excellent writer, and I don't think Google is claiming this tool would make a person write like King. And the substitution suggestion in Kennedy's speech is just the way the language use has trended since his time... One can note that the Star Trek franchise changed the saying from "Where no man has gone before" to "Where no-one has gone before" in the time between then and now, as well. The Bible is probably the worst example to pull up for this topic; paging through the over 20 translations on biblegateway.com shows the passage in question is also sometimes translated as "great works", "mighty works", or just "miracles." Which should you use? It depends completely on what you're doing.
Of everything noted, the only possibly concerning one is really the lack of suggestions on a David Duke interview. If I had to guess, I'd chalk that up to lack of training data, and it may be something Google wants to consider addressing.
But at the end of the day, the overall thesis of the report is flawed. "But words do mean things," says the author. Yes, they do. Which is why it could be nice to have an auto-editor lifting up examples of words that might mean something other than the author intended (and then the author can choose to change their phrasing or stick with the original). Nothing about this feature claims to make users magically better at writing; it's an assistive tool to open the possibility, not unlike a spell-checker.
We've had Microsoft Word grammar checker for literal decades. This technology is neither particularly new nor, IMHO, particularly interesting (certainly not interesting enough to kick up this news cycle). It's no more 1984 than some random stranger online offering an opinion on your verbage is 1984.
"Motherboard" was included in Apple's style guide in 2020 as "don't use" (https://help.apple.com/applestyleguide/#/apsg72b28652). Like it or hate it, this is the direction the industry, of which Google is a part, is moving. I'm sure a publication called Motherboard might have an opinion on this, but neither they nor Google are the final arbiters on the language. The I Have a Dream speech example is pretty anecdotal; King was an excellent writer, and I don't think Google is claiming this tool would make a person write like King. And the substitution suggestion in Kennedy's speech is just the way the language use has trended since his time... One can note that the Star Trek franchise changed the saying from "Where no man has gone before" to "Where no-one has gone before" in the time between then and now, as well. The Bible is probably the worst example to pull up for this topic; paging through the over 20 translations on biblegateway.com shows the passage in question is also sometimes translated as "great works", "mighty works", or just "miracles." Which should you use? It depends completely on what you're doing.
Of everything noted, the only possibly concerning one is really the lack of suggestions on a David Duke interview. If I had to guess, I'd chalk that up to lack of training data, and it may be something Google wants to consider addressing.
But at the end of the day, the overall thesis of the report is flawed. "But words do mean things," says the author. Yes, they do. Which is why it could be nice to have an auto-editor lifting up examples of words that might mean something other than the author intended (and then the author can choose to change their phrasing or stick with the original). Nothing about this feature claims to make users magically better at writing; it's an assistive tool to open the possibility, not unlike a spell-checker.
We've had Microsoft Word grammar checker for literal decades. This technology is neither particularly new nor, IMHO, particularly interesting (certainly not interesting enough to kick up this news cycle). It's no more 1984 than some random stranger online offering an opinion on your verbage is 1984.