4 ms·
Why not pick all those other hills to die on, then? If you want to talk about statistical methods being a horrible idea for policing, I'm with you. Probably m
by free_rms 6y ago
Why not pick all those other hills to die on, then?
If you want to talk about statistical methods being a horrible idea for policing, I'm with you. Probably most machine learning experts would be, too, just like most software engineers don't trust electronic voting. Instead, people chose "dataset bias affects machine learning models", the most basic Machine Learning 101 fact ever, to try and debate against.
It's like the woke people seek out the weakest possible ground because it generates in-group opposition that they can fight with and out-woke. Stronger ground could have national consensus, way beyond bay area consensus.
- joshuamorton 6y ago> Instead, people chose "dataset bias affects machine learning models", the most basic Machine Learning 101 fact ever, to try and debate against. No one disagrees with that statement. The point that the ethicists are making is that that isn't the whole story, and that focusing only on the lowest hanging fruit (dataset bias) is ultimately harmful since it shifts focus away from the other, deeper problems.
- cxw 6y agoActually, that's Gebru's point. Gebru was pointing out frustration that LeCun was focusing on this narrow question of statistical bias, rather than the broader social issues you're getting at.
- saym 6y agoYour comment, among the sea of others, got through and made some sense to me. My follow-up questions are: Does that negate the truthfulness of LeCun's response? What would Gebru rather he do or say? I feel like I can't tell what the desired form of action is from the article, and I'm unsure what good it does for removing bias from ML to attack prominent figures (on twitter let alone anywhere public).