3 ms·

The article contains no occurrences of the term “racism” or “racist.” Why is there necessarily no problem with a bias if it comes from a physiological differen

The article contains no occurrences of the term “racism” or “racist.” Why is there necessarily no problem with a bias if it comes from a physiological difference? If a certain group of people gets falsely convicted of crimes at a disproportionate rate because some computer program misidentifies them more frequently than it does other groups, that is a huge problem that needs to be fixed, even if the misidentification is due to some inherent difference between the group.

FakeComments 8y ago
You are correct — however, it mentions her politicking on the basis of it being so: > Buolamwini, who’s also founded a coalition of scholars, activists and others called the Algorithmic Justice League, has blended her scholarly investigations with activism. To respond to your main point: > If a certain group of people gets falsely convicted of crimes at a disproportionate rate because some computer program misidentifies them more frequently than it does other groups, that is a huge problem that needs to be fixed No, it doesn’t. Not if the reason it’s happening is some physical characteristic just makes it harder to be sure in those cases. The only relevant question is if the rate in each category is acceptable in terms of false positives, and truly, if in each case we reach a level of certainty that convicts the individual beyond a reasonable doubt. The only reason that you care so much is that you’re a racist, who believes we need to balance the treatment of racially essential tribes — rather than that we need to ensure our technology works at an appropriate level on an individual basis, where varying physical characteristics mean it works more or less well for different people, for which the only relevant criterion for its use in a case is its certainty for a particular face (and not its relative certainty for classes of faces). I notice you people only seem to be outraged on the topic of small differences in skin color — but that familial DNA tracing works better on men than women is just accepted and taken as normal. Can you explain why you think differential facial recognition scores actually is meaningful? I mean, you asserted it was a problem — what particularly is problematic about it? Edit: For below — no, just this particular case isn’t racism, it’s a genuine difference between people and someone trying to racebait about it. Not every racial difference is racism, and a lot of claims of racism are just made up nonsense. https://youtu.be/wR2lK36Tc4M https://youtu.be/wR2lK36Tc4M
- mikeash 8y ago
  Ah, the good ol’ “the real racism is pointing out racism” thing. I assume you also oppose things like wheelchair ramps and Braille signage, since any problems handicapped people have with stairs or printed signs is due to physiological differences?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

FakeComments 8y ago

You are correct — however, it mentions her politicking on the basis of it being so: > Buolamwini, who’s also founded a coalition of scholars, activists and others called the Algorithmic Justice League, has blended her scholarly investigations with activism. To respond to your main point: > If a certain group of people gets falsely convicted of crimes at a disproportionate rate because some computer program misidentifies them more frequently than it does other groups, that is a huge problem that needs to be fixed No, it doesn’t. Not if the reason it’s happening is some physical characteristic just makes it harder to be sure in those cases. The only relevant question is if the rate in each category is acceptable in terms of false positives, and truly, if in each case we reach a level of certainty that convicts the individual beyond a reasonable doubt. The only reason that you care so much is that you’re a racist, who believes we need to balance the treatment of racially essential tribes — rather than that we need to ensure our technology works at an appropriate level on an individual basis, where varying physical characteristics mean it works more or less well for different people, for which the only relevant criterion for its use in a case is its certainty for a particular face (and not its relative certainty for classes of faces). I notice you people only seem to be outraged on the topic of small differences in skin color — but that familial DNA tracing works better on men than women is just accepted and taken as normal. Can you explain why you think differential facial recognition scores actually is meaningful? I mean, you asserted it was a problem — what particularly is problematic about it? Edit: For below — no, just this particular case isn’t racism, it’s a genuine difference between people and someone trying to racebait about it. Not every racial difference is racism, and a lot of claims of racism are just made up nonsense. https://youtu.be/wR2lK36Tc4M https://youtu.be/wR2lK36Tc4M

mikeash 8y ago
Ah, the good ol’ “the real racism is pointing out racism” thing. I assume you also oppose things like wheelchair ramps and Braille signage, since any problems handicapped people have with stairs or printed signs is due to physiological differences?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]