4 ms·

I stoped reading here: “One effect: face recognition in cameras is notorious for its racist bias, ” If you’re going to say stupid things, you don’t deserve my a

• a1369209993 6y ago
  To be scrupulouly fair, it's entirly possible to be notorious for something you didn't actually do, and social justice warriors have certainly tried to make that the case for facial recognition's alleged racist bias, to some degree successfully. So the statement you quoted is technically correct[0], at least among certain sufficiently credulous groups. To be less-scrupulouly fair, the rest of the article is actually fairly on point and has little to with the author's susceptibility to memetic disease (yay compartmentalization bias?). 0: The best kind of correct!
• callmeal 6y ago
  It's not stupid when it's easily proven. See here[0] and here[1] for instance. 0: https://www.creativebloq.com/news/twitter-racist-algorithm https://www.creativebloq.com/news/twitter-racist-algorithm 1: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03419-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03419-6
  • gwern 6y ago
    For something so 'easily proven', I would point out that the Twitter thing was never 'proven', and their own testing beforehand found zero bias (as opposed to a bunch of motivated Twitter users posting samples until they got their confirmation bias's worth). I take it you didn't actually read Twitter's post on this. Your second example is, if anything, even worse (read the entire article). And these are your two chosen examples, so undeniable as to shut down all dissent and doubt?
    • wiml 6y ago
      Who's trying to shut down all dissent and doubt here?
      • imwillofficial 6y ago
        Using words like “proven” When the reality it is no such thing.