3 ms·

>Your statement attributes particular causes to the current state of things I didn't, nor should it matter how we got to where we are for a builder of a thing.

>Your statement attributes particular causes to the current state of things I didn't, nor should it matter how we got to where we are for a builder of a thing. > and implies a certain valuation of the current state of things This may have happened, but I'd disagree: recognizing that there exists inequality doesn't cast value judgement on that inequality. I simply stated that they're there. Perhaps saying "how to prevent them" is casting value judgement, so I might walk that back, model creators should be aware of the biases and aware of tools and strategies to account for them, if so desired. Personally I think you're a bad person if, armed with the tools to detect and correct, you decide its okay to build something that has a systemic error that wrongly disfavors some group. But perhaps that's just me.

westoncb 8y ago
> ... recognizing that there exists inequality doesn't cast value judgement on that inequality. You just asserted your attribution of cause right there: inequality. There are multiple possible causes for differing demographic representations in various roles. This is not a settled issue, even though people on both sides promote competing ideologies to the effect that it is. (And again, I have intentionally left my own views on the subject out of this, even though I suspect they align with yours (insofar as cause attribution goes): I'm just pointing out the fact that this isn't something society agrees on, nor is it something the scientific data resolves unambiguously.) > Personally I think you're a bad person if, armed with the tools to detect and correct, you decide its okay to build something that has a systemic error that wrongly disfavors some group. Agreed, hinging on that point about cause attribution.