4 ms·

(b) possible to identify what exactly happened (c) blind to the context and inputs outside of the algorithm Neither of these are really true for neural network

(b) possible to identify what exactly happened (c) blind to the context and inputs outside of the algorithm Neither of these are really true for neural networks: it's hard to pinpoint the exact feature or hidden layer which results in a particular classification. Training also requires datasets which are often proprietary, and stochastic approaches mean you can get different networks from the same dataset.

notyourday 9y ago
You may get a different network from a same dataset. You will get a different result if you let two humans classify the data.
- strangecasts 9y ago
  Not "may" but will - it's very easy to render your network essentially unauditable (you don't have thousands of petabytes' worth of storage available? you can't fab your own ML coprocessor? too bad!) You bring up Trump's Twitter suspension in the other subthread, but in that case the failure was transient, and the person responsible and their reasoning were quickly identified; YouTube has demonetized videos with little to no explanation or recourse. Uniformity is absolutely a goal where people's livelihoods are affected, but ML algorithms can't guarantee it by themselves: they make it even more important to also maintain accountability and transparency.
  - notyourday 9y ago
    > Not "may" but will - it's very easy to render your network essentially unauditable (you don't have thousands of petabytes' worth of storage available? you can't fab your own ML coprocessor? too bad!) Google can. So that does not apply. > You bring up Trump's Twitter suspension in the other subthread, but in that case the failure was transient, and the person responsible and their reasoning were quickly identified; YouTube has demonetized videos with little to no explanation or recourse. There's no recourse or explanation because it is not youtube's business model regardless of what/who makes a decision to demonetize them. Adding arbitrary human behavior to those decisions only makes it worse.
    - strangecasts 9y ago
      Google can. So that does not apply. If nobody outside Google can test the algorithm, by definition it isn't auditable. Adding arbitrary human behavior to those decisions only makes it worse. Neural networks are derived from human behavior - they don't magically divine the spirit of what you want to do, they're an approximation based on training data someone has to put together.

notyourday 9y ago

You may get a different network from a same dataset. You will get a different result if you let two humans classify the data.

strangecasts 9y ago
Not "may" but will - it's very easy to render your network essentially unauditable (you don't have thousands of petabytes' worth of storage available? you can't fab your own ML coprocessor? too bad!) You bring up Trump's Twitter suspension in the other subthread, but in that case the failure was transient, and the person responsible and their reasoning were quickly identified; YouTube has demonetized videos with little to no explanation or recourse. Uniformity is absolutely a goal where people's livelihoods are affected, but ML algorithms can't guarantee it by themselves: they make it even more important to also maintain accountability and transparency.
- notyourday 9y ago
  > Not "may" but will - it's very easy to render your network essentially unauditable (you don't have thousands of petabytes' worth of storage available? you can't fab your own ML coprocessor? too bad!) Google can. So that does not apply. > You bring up Trump's Twitter suspension in the other subthread, but in that case the failure was transient, and the person responsible and their reasoning were quickly identified; YouTube has demonetized videos with little to no explanation or recourse. There's no recourse or explanation because it is not youtube's business model regardless of what/who makes a decision to demonetize them. Adding arbitrary human behavior to those decisions only makes it worse.
  - strangecasts 9y ago
    Google can. So that does not apply. If nobody outside Google can test the algorithm, by definition it isn't auditable. Adding arbitrary human behavior to those decisions only makes it worse. Neural networks are derived from human behavior - they don't magically divine the spirit of what you want to do, they're an approximation based on training data someone has to put together.