9 ms·

The 'technologist' would typically (I would argue) want to remove bias from data, not introduce it to make a model less effective at its intended purpose. The

by krona 6y ago

The 'technologist' would typically (I would argue) want to remove bias from data, not introduce it to make a model less effective at its intended purpose. The article suggests making models politically aware, which is probably standard practice in many parts of China.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
bsenftner 6y ago
I believe the article is advocating being aware of the 2nd level effects of our work, such as how the power hierarchy shifts when our software is in use.
ardy42 6y ago
> The 'technologist' would typically (I would argue) want to remove bias from data, not introduce it to make a model less effective at its intended purpose. This quote from the OP directly address that attitude: "When the field of AI believes it is neutral, it both fails to notice biased data and builds systems that sanctify the status quo and advance the interests of the powerful. What is needed is a field that exposes and critiques systems that concentrate power, while co-creating new systems with impacted communities: AI by and for the people." > The article suggests making models politically aware, which is probably standard practice in many parts of China. While that's a technically correct statement, it misses the point by a mile. Firstly, it's impossible to make non-political models: at a minimum they embed the politics of the status-quo, which is often falsely confused with the absence of "politics" (for the same reason it's hard to see the mountain itself when you're standing on top of it). Secondly, what makes a model designed to embed the politics of the Communist Party of China objectionable is not that it embeds an instance of the class "politics," but rather characteristics of that specific instance.
- DougBTX 6y ago
  > This quote from the OP directly address that attitude It doesn’t directly address it, the parent was talking about intention, the article is talking about outcome. Smooshing then together produces nonsense: “when someone wants to remove bias from data, they will fail to notice biased data”. Surely it isn’t a given that someone trying to remove bias will believe that all bias has been removed?
landryraccoon 6y ago
> remove bias from data, I wonder if this is really a possible goal. Might it not be better to be aware of the impossibility of true objectivity, and decide to be strongly opinionated in favor of certain values? Certainly if a machine learning model not only predicts something but acts as an actual agent in the world to affect some goal, it becomes impossible to claim pure objectivity, as the AI itself now is acting to change the world in pursuit of that goal. I mean, it's hard to argue purely "objectively" that cruelty , totalitarianism and power centralization are "wrong". Any statement about them eventually comes to a moral argument, which means that AI researchers ultimately have to take responsibility themselves for being opinionated moral agents. "Remove bias" could just be passing the buck for support for entrenching the status quo or worse. Things like democracy, egalitarianism, freedom of thought and opportunity don't just spring up spontaneously, they were hard to fight for and win.
Udik 6y ago
> remove bias from data, not introduce it The problem is in finding the bias, since it's a quantity inferred ex post by checking the discrepancy between reality and expectations. And since we have come to ideologically reject the very idea that there might be reasons for the discrepancy, then it must be all up to bias. Which I personally think it's stupid and counterproductive, since when you have actual reasons you can act upon them to improve the situation, while "bias" is only useful to play a power game in which anyone who disagrees with you can be called racist and forced to repent and apologize for his/ her "bias".

by krona 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

bsenftner 6y ago

I believe the article is advocating being aware of the 2nd level effects of our work, such as how the power hierarchy shifts when our software is in use.

ardy42 6y ago

> The 'technologist' would typically (I would argue) want to remove bias from data, not introduce it to make a model less effective at its intended purpose. This quote from the OP directly address that attitude: "When the field of AI believes it is neutral, it both fails to notice biased data and builds systems that sanctify the status quo and advance the interests of the powerful. What is needed is a field that exposes and critiques systems that concentrate power, while co-creating new systems with impacted communities: AI by and for the people." > The article suggests making models politically aware, which is probably standard practice in many parts of China. While that's a technically correct statement, it misses the point by a mile. Firstly, it's impossible to make non-political models: at a minimum they embed the politics of the status-quo, which is often falsely confused with the absence of "politics" (for the same reason it's hard to see the mountain itself when you're standing on top of it). Secondly, what makes a model designed to embed the politics of the Communist Party of China objectionable is not that it embeds an instance of the class "politics," but rather characteristics of that specific instance.

DougBTX 6y ago
> This quote from the OP directly address that attitude It doesn’t directly address it, the parent was talking about intention, the article is talking about outcome. Smooshing then together produces nonsense: “when someone wants to remove bias from data, they will fail to notice biased data”. Surely it isn’t a given that someone trying to remove bias will believe that all bias has been removed?

landryraccoon 6y ago

> remove bias from data, I wonder if this is really a possible goal. Might it not be better to be aware of the impossibility of true objectivity, and decide to be strongly opinionated in favor of certain values? Certainly if a machine learning model not only predicts something but acts as an actual agent in the world to affect some goal, it becomes impossible to claim pure objectivity, as the AI itself now is acting to change the world in pursuit of that goal. I mean, it's hard to argue purely "objectively" that cruelty , totalitarianism and power centralization are "wrong". Any statement about them eventually comes to a moral argument, which means that AI researchers ultimately have to take responsibility themselves for being opinionated moral agents. "Remove bias" could just be passing the buck for support for entrenching the status quo or worse. Things like democracy, egalitarianism, freedom of thought and opportunity don't just spring up spontaneously, they were hard to fight for and win.

Udik 6y ago

> remove bias from data, not introduce it The problem is in finding the bias, since it's a quantity inferred ex post by checking the discrepancy between reality and expectations. And since we have come to ideologically reject the very idea that there might be reasons for the discrepancy, then it must be all up to bias. Which I personally think it's stupid and counterproductive, since when you have actual reasons you can act upon them to improve the situation, while "bias" is only useful to play a power game in which anyone who disagrees with you can be called racist and forced to repent and apologize for his/ her "bias".