3 ms·
You'll be waiting a long time. The systems simply do not operate at this level of awareness or reasoning, and likely never will.
by zaroth 7y ago
You'll be waiting a long time. The systems simply do not operate at this level of awareness or reasoning, and likely never will.
- sokoloff 7y agoI don't think GP is suggesting a conscious or intentional bias would be present. Imagine that a car swerves around a pedestrian A who happens to be in light blue jeans and a white jacket and strikes an undetected pedestrian B who happens to be in black pants and a black jacket. It seems easy to imagine how that could happen to any driver, right? Now, imagine that it's an autonomous car, pedestrian A happens to be white, and pedestrian B happens to be black. Boom, there's your scandalous story: an autonomous car just swerved to avoid a white pedestrian and struck a black pedestrian.
- beerandt 7y agoThis is exactly what I meant, thank you. But there is a bit more to it. The A or B side-by-side is the most simple comparison to make the point. Some of the same dangers that are in play now might still be risks as AI cars become more common. For instance, minority neighborhoods tend to not have as many street lights at night. The cars might be smart enough to compensate. But if they aren't, AI has the potential of falling victim to statistical correlation. Headline by click bait reporter: "Studies show self-driving cars kill minorities at higher than average rates" It doesn't matter if the real cause was street lights.
- beerandt 7y agoThey don't have to. All you need is a video of a swerving car hitting one person and missing the other. The "why" is irrelevant. The implication will suffice, in light of the public/media's understanding of ml / ai. They will think the car "chose" which person to hit.