5 ms·

Critiques without concrete alternatives are usually useless because you haven’t ascertained whether a better solution is even possible.

wcerfgba 6y ago
Lack of a (viable) alternative to a solution doesn't negate critiquing an existing solution. Critique can provide insight that leads to generation of new solutions or reforms to the existing solution to fix some of its underlying problems. You always end up with more information than you started, which is a good thing.
abdullahkhalids 6y ago
Showing in the 1800s that Newtonian Gravity fails to account for the precession of Mercury, with no idea on how to construct the General Theory of Relativity, doesn't make the critique of Newtonian Gravity any less valid. Not to mention they provide 3 proposals of improving things.
Bukhmanizer 6y ago
More irritating to me, is most solutions essentially boil down to “give me (the author) all of the power”. For example, this page suggests hiring a “ethics expert” to perform an “algorithm audit”. Unsurprisingly the author of this page has started an ethics consulting company. Because there’s no way that they could be biased or use their power to benefit themselves, right?
- Bukhmanizer 6y ago
  It’s funny because it changes based on whoever writes the article. Management thinks that management should get final decision power, academics think that academia should get to audit the code.
dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
Well, the author proposes the algorithm used should be open, i.e. known to the user. But this means the user will try to game it, so the creator would prefer to keep it secret. The big question is: can we make a transparent algorithm that can't be gamed (spam, SEO, etc.)? As cryptography demonstrates, this is definitely possible, but requires a lot of research, smart design and may not be cheap to implement.
throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
Critiquing is an essential part of finding out whether a better solution does or can exists.

wcerfgba 6y ago

Lack of a (viable) alternative to a solution doesn't negate critiquing an existing solution. Critique can provide insight that leads to generation of new solutions or reforms to the existing solution to fix some of its underlying problems. You always end up with more information than you started, which is a good thing.

abdullahkhalids 6y ago

Showing in the 1800s that Newtonian Gravity fails to account for the precession of Mercury, with no idea on how to construct the General Theory of Relativity, doesn't make the critique of Newtonian Gravity any less valid. Not to mention they provide 3 proposals of improving things.

Bukhmanizer 6y ago

More irritating to me, is most solutions essentially boil down to “give me (the author) all of the power”. For example, this page suggests hiring a “ethics expert” to perform an “algorithm audit”. Unsurprisingly the author of this page has started an ethics consulting company. Because there’s no way that they could be biased or use their power to benefit themselves, right?

Bukhmanizer 6y ago
It’s funny because it changes based on whoever writes the article. Management thinks that management should get final decision power, academics think that academia should get to audit the code.

dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago

Well, the author proposes the algorithm used should be open, i.e. known to the user. But this means the user will try to game it, so the creator would prefer to keep it secret. The big question is: can we make a transparent algorithm that can't be gamed (spam, SEO, etc.)? As cryptography demonstrates, this is definitely possible, but requires a lot of research, smart design and may not be cheap to implement.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago

Critiquing is an essential part of finding out whether a better solution does or can exists.