Could we please get that changed to the actual article and add a (2016)? http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2016/02/oxford-uehiro-prize-in-practical-ethics-s

Could we please get that changed to the actual article and add a (2016)? http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2016/02/oxford-uehiro-prize-in-practical-ethics-should-we-take-moral-advice-from-our-computers-written-by-mahmoud-ghanem/ http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2016/02/oxford-uehiro-p... That contains much more debatable content. But even with the linked excerpt, I find it hard to draw the rather absolute conclusion the title suggests. Computers are indeed very good at both points, but only after a human carefully crafted a problem specific set of instructions to hold its virtual hand. I think the bias and modelling discussions of the last few years sufficiently show that it's rather non-trivial to project these functions to algorithms/ML/... and state of the art in the foreseeable future is not particularly good at many aspects of the tasks mentioned in the article. In the long form it even draws analogies between asking the phone for food recommendations and ethics considerations. Every recommendation engine out there is being actively gamed, that was the case in 2016 just as it is now. There's some truth to the article of course, e.g. more crafted systems that actively address human biases, but we're nowhere near a point to even remotely let our computers take over ethical considerations - even if it's just a recommendation.