4 ms·
Why not? Seriously: let us take as given that the AI models are biased. Will you also admit that the existing processes are biased? If so, then what we need to
by mcherm 8y ago
Why not?
Seriously: let us take as given that the AI models are biased. Will you also admit that the existing processes are biased? If so, then what we need to ask is which is MORE biased. It might be complaining that we shouldn't release self-driving cars because on rare occasions they cause accidents.
There is, however, another criterion besides how biased it is: how biased it will be in the future. Human-driven processes have the opportunity to become less biased in the future (also the chance to become more biased, but overall things tend to improve). AI processes that are opaque might lock in bias in a fashion that is unreviewable. I believe that the solution is to build AI models that are more transparent -- that could be BETTER (in terms of avoiding bias) than the human-driven processes we use today.
- ummonk 8y agoI think we basically have the same view. I don't support black box machine learning models. I do support using automated tests and simple well defined objective criteria though, which is basically a transparent AI model. It's just that generally what seems to distinguish whether something is called "machine learning" rather than "data science and modelling" is that the former is black box and the latter is not.
- Novashi 8y ago>Why not? It has to be better than humans. That requires the rare genius to fix the problem, or we have to accidentally invent something better than ourselves. This is a common defense of autopilot systems in cars: it's not perfect, but it's better than the average.
- linuxftw 8y agoMachines are not intuitive or nuanced. They are incapable of learning and formulating abstract though, only identifying patterns and optimizing for some desired outcome.