8 ms·

I wonder if machine learning will lead to worsening of the echo-chamber problem. "Error: The message cannot be sent because it does not conform to accepted gro

by oakwhiz 10y ago

I wonder if machine learning will lead to worsening of the echo-chamber problem. "Error: The message cannot be sent because it does not conform to accepted groupthink."

golergka 10y ago
Sorry, your content was removed because we determined that it was linked to fake news content and/or was deemed to offensive for some members of our platform.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  Its OK poltifact marked it fake news not a robot. https://i.redd.it/x7oi5njhf7ry.png https://i.redd.it/x7oi5njhf7ry.png http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Politi22fact22.jpg http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/...
AndrewKemendo 10y ago
Anytime someone has a scary thought about ML it all comes down to control problems - eg. the machine having the final say about what happens without human being able to override it. In gmail now, if you say "attached" in your email but don't attach something, you can still send the message, it just gives you a warning. You're consistently shown improved interfaces and content because of ML, yet those aren't scary and you don't feel out of control. I think people have seen way too many scary movies about AI, and it's tainted our whole discipline.
- Danihan 10y ago
  Look at red lights as an example. Those are just primitive robots. Yet, when I'm sitting at an empty intersection at night, even though I have excellent, advanced sensors in my eyes, I'm not allowed to just run a red light. Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The robots already have the final say in that arena, because human law (for now) backs them up. It's not based on scary movies... primitive robots already force me to waste my time on a nightly basis.
  - cortesoft 10y ago
    You absolutely can run the red light, it would just be against the law. That has nothing to do with robots. We have been making laws that limit what we can do for millennia.
    - Danihan 10y ago
      The law has everything to do with robots and how they will integrate with society, like it or not.
      - cortesoft 10y ago
        Right, which is exactly my point.... the law is the thing to worry about, not the robots.
        zepto 10y ago
        Why not both?
    - _iao 10y ago
      Law is literally enforced group-think
    - __jal 10y ago
      Right. It is just like explosives. There is no problem leaving agents of rapid chemical reaction lying around where kids may find them, it is the kids. This also has nothing to do with robots.
  - tyingq 10y ago
    Gmail does this already. Try and attach a Windows exe to an email. I have valid reasons to want to do that, but have to find workarounds. It seems happy with uploading the same file to Google drive and putting a link in the email. Though that doesn't solve my use case of sharing with Chinese Nationals who are blocked from those urls. I'm also not clear on how/why this is somehow more secure.
- dmreedy 10y ago
  So, I disagree a little. The first-order problem is one of control, as you describe. The second-order problem is one of comfort with control, and the normalization that that entails. Once you accept a certain piece of automation, you tend accept its failures alongside its successes. To continue on from the GP, it is entirely likely that an error message along the lines of "your phrasing does not conform to polite societal norms" (to avoid the term 'groupthink') adds one extra layer of friction between an intention and an act. This can be a good thing (your google example), but it's not universally a good thing, because of possible conditioning effects that can have subtle and long-lasting implications. I agree that it's not scary in the "Skynet is going to take over" sense. Much rather in the "They Live" sense, though even without the bare malicious intents there.
- LeifCarrotson 10y ago
  https://www.xkcd.com/251/ https://www.xkcd.com/251/ > Cueball: Hey. Hey! Stop retracting my CD! > I feel uncomfortable when my computer physically struggles with me. Sure, I can overpower it now, but it feels like a few short steps from here to the robot war. Another step towards this war is the Bluetooth connection in my wife's car. As a passenger, I cannot connect my phone to play music, directions, or make calls unless the car is in park, because "This function is not available while moving". And I hate it. We don't want to sit and wait to set off while its 8-year-old Bluetooth hardware pairs, we want to get going and let the navigator do the navigating. Fortunately, this contrasts with the Waze navigation app's message box which actually detects motion using the GPS, and displays "Typing is disabled while driving - OK / Passenger"
- nebabyte 10y ago
  > now The problem is that - taking away that control is just one parameter, one preset, one configuration setting away - We don't exactly have the best track record for consistently picking people we can trust not to fuck with those configuration settings for their own ends > I think people have seen way too many scary movies about AI, and it's tainted our whole discipline. I think people have been burned too many times by their 'authorities who know better', and fortunately at least now have a sense of where the slippery slopes are (if not exactly how best to navigate them). I'd pick erring on the side of caution over sliding down one of those cliffs any day. If you think it's such an impairment to progress, feel free to live in a non-paranoid place; but if "it's only paranoia when someone's not trying to break it for their own gain", as far as I'm concerned it's rarely-to-never going to be 'just paranoia'. (With that said, this particular post isn't too scary, and just reduces to the "control your hardware" problem. That, and 'control your networks' are the big ones for now.)
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  > I think people have seen way too many scary movies about AI, and it's tainted our whole discipline. I think this is ridiculously unfair. My concerns about policies like this have nothing at all to do with strong AI. We don't need scary movies to see examples of software decisions made with no access to human overrides. A simple and extremely topical example: years ago, my Google account somehow got screwed up. It decided I was 13, and never aged. Six years after I made it, I was still 13. It turned out there was no way to fix that. If you were under 13, they would close your account for ToS violation. Then, after closure, you could fax proof of age and get your account fixed. But if your account was listed at 13, forever? No such luck. There was no way whatsoever to fix the problem. No phone number, and (as with all Google problems) lengthy support forum threads amounting to "deal with it". I have no idea how this happened. But it was completely irreparable, until one day the bug got fixed and my age was right. That's the stuff I worry about - simple rules being applied absolutely, with no recourse to human judgement.
mseebach 10y ago
Groupthink is mostly a problem because it happens subconsciously. A group that actively wants its members to think a specific way has always had other means. When you're (as the leadership of an organisation) actively installing a filter, I think you'd be quite more likely to install the filter that would say "Error: The message cannot be sent because it merely reinforces the majority viewpoint and does not add new information to the conversation."

by oakwhiz 10y ago

I wonder if machine learning will lead to worsening of the echo-chamber problem. "Error: The message cannot be sent because it does not conform to accepted groupthink."

golergka 10y ago

Sorry, your content was removed because we determined that it was linked to fake news content and/or was deemed to offensive for some members of our platform.

cmdrfred 10y ago
Its OK poltifact marked it fake news not a robot. https://i.redd.it/x7oi5njhf7ry.png https://i.redd.it/x7oi5njhf7ry.png http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Politi22fact22.jpg http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/...

AndrewKemendo 10y ago

Anytime someone has a scary thought about ML it all comes down to control problems - eg. the machine having the final say about what happens without human being able to override it. In gmail now, if you say "attached" in your email but don't attach something, you can still send the message, it just gives you a warning. You're consistently shown improved interfaces and content because of ML, yet those aren't scary and you don't feel out of control. I think people have seen way too many scary movies about AI, and it's tainted our whole discipline.

Danihan 10y ago
Look at red lights as an example. Those are just primitive robots. Yet, when I'm sitting at an empty intersection at night, even though I have excellent, advanced sensors in my eyes, I'm not allowed to just run a red light. Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The robots already have the final say in that arena, because human law (for now) backs them up. It's not based on scary movies... primitive robots already force me to waste my time on a nightly basis.
- cortesoft 10y ago
  You absolutely can run the red light, it would just be against the law. That has nothing to do with robots. We have been making laws that limit what we can do for millennia.
  - Danihan 10y ago
    The law has everything to do with robots and how they will integrate with society, like it or not.
    - cortesoft 10y ago
      Right, which is exactly my point.... the law is the thing to worry about, not the robots.
      - zepto 10y ago
        Why not both?
  - _iao 10y ago
    Law is literally enforced group-think
  - __jal 10y ago
    Right. It is just like explosives. There is no problem leaving agents of rapid chemical reaction lying around where kids may find them, it is the kids. This also has nothing to do with robots.
- tyingq 10y ago
  Gmail does this already. Try and attach a Windows exe to an email. I have valid reasons to want to do that, but have to find workarounds. It seems happy with uploading the same file to Google drive and putting a link in the email. Though that doesn't solve my use case of sharing with Chinese Nationals who are blocked from those urls. I'm also not clear on how/why this is somehow more secure.
dmreedy 10y ago
So, I disagree a little. The first-order problem is one of control, as you describe. The second-order problem is one of comfort with control, and the normalization that that entails. Once you accept a certain piece of automation, you tend accept its failures alongside its successes. To continue on from the GP, it is entirely likely that an error message along the lines of "your phrasing does not conform to polite societal norms" (to avoid the term 'groupthink') adds one extra layer of friction between an intention and an act. This can be a good thing (your google example), but it's not universally a good thing, because of possible conditioning effects that can have subtle and long-lasting implications. I agree that it's not scary in the "Skynet is going to take over" sense. Much rather in the "They Live" sense, though even without the bare malicious intents there.
LeifCarrotson 10y ago
https://www.xkcd.com/251/ https://www.xkcd.com/251/ > Cueball: Hey. Hey! Stop retracting my CD! > I feel uncomfortable when my computer physically struggles with me. Sure, I can overpower it now, but it feels like a few short steps from here to the robot war. Another step towards this war is the Bluetooth connection in my wife's car. As a passenger, I cannot connect my phone to play music, directions, or make calls unless the car is in park, because "This function is not available while moving". And I hate it. We don't want to sit and wait to set off while its 8-year-old Bluetooth hardware pairs, we want to get going and let the navigator do the navigating. Fortunately, this contrasts with the Waze navigation app's message box which actually detects motion using the GPS, and displays "Typing is disabled while driving - OK / Passenger"
nebabyte 10y ago
> now The problem is that - taking away that control is just one parameter, one preset, one configuration setting away - We don't exactly have the best track record for consistently picking people we can trust not to fuck with those configuration settings for their own ends > I think people have seen way too many scary movies about AI, and it's tainted our whole discipline. I think people have been burned too many times by their 'authorities who know better', and fortunately at least now have a sense of where the slippery slopes are (if not exactly how best to navigate them). I'd pick erring on the side of caution over sliding down one of those cliffs any day. If you think it's such an impairment to progress, feel free to live in a non-paranoid place; but if "it's only paranoia when someone's not trying to break it for their own gain", as far as I'm concerned it's rarely-to-never going to be 'just paranoia'. (With that said, this particular post isn't too scary, and just reduces to the "control your hardware" problem. That, and 'control your networks' are the big ones for now.)
Bartweiss 10y ago
> I think people have seen way too many scary movies about AI, and it's tainted our whole discipline. I think this is ridiculously unfair. My concerns about policies like this have nothing at all to do with strong AI. We don't need scary movies to see examples of software decisions made with no access to human overrides. A simple and extremely topical example: years ago, my Google account somehow got screwed up. It decided I was 13, and never aged. Six years after I made it, I was still 13. It turned out there was no way to fix that. If you were under 13, they would close your account for ToS violation. Then, after closure, you could fax proof of age and get your account fixed. But if your account was listed at 13, forever? No such luck. There was no way whatsoever to fix the problem. No phone number, and (as with all Google problems) lengthy support forum threads amounting to "deal with it". I have no idea how this happened. But it was completely irreparable, until one day the bug got fixed and my age was right. That's the stuff I worry about - simple rules being applied absolutely, with no recourse to human judgement.

mseebach 10y ago

Groupthink is mostly a problem because it happens subconsciously. A group that actively wants its members to think a specific way has always had other means. When you're (as the leadership of an organisation) actively installing a filter, I think you'd be quite more likely to install the filter that would say "Error: The message cannot be sent because it merely reinforces the majority viewpoint and does not add new information to the conversation."