3 ms·

I mean cool. But honestly what is this "fairness and equity" bullshit? Trying to nip false advertising in the bud is one thing and I believe something the FTC h

by dcow 4y ago

I mean cool. But honestly what is this "fairness and equity" bullshit? Trying to nip false advertising in the bud is one thing and I believe something the FTC has authority over. But who in the world granted the FTC the authority to pursue the fairness and equity of any product, let alone an AI product? I mean I'm not anti-fairness but I'm also astonished to see the FTC trying to regulate it. Thou shalt not sell a product that doesn't achieve equity? Really?!

genocidicbunny 4y ago
If you actually go read the linked article, it's pretty clearly spelled out: The FTC has decades of experience enforcing three laws important to developers and users of AI: Section 5 of the FTC Act. The FTC Act prohibits unfair or deceptive practices. That would include the sale or use of – for example – racially biased algorithms. Fair Credit Reporting Act. The FCRA comes into play in certain circumstances where an algorithm is used to deny people employment, housing, credit, insurance, or other benefits. Equal Credit Opportunity Act. The ECOA makes it illegal for a company to use a biased algorithm that results in credit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or because a person receives public assistance. Seems pretty clear cut to me that they're saying you can't use the 'but the AI did it' excuse if the net result is that your product is violating these.
- dcow 4y ago
  If you actually go read the FTC act, section 5 is about preventing unfair methods of competition. It's massive stretch to interpret that as "deploying an unfair consumer algorithm".
  - genocidicbunny 4y ago
    You missed the second half of 15 USC § 45.a.1: (1) Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful. Now, IANAL, but it seems to me that the example the FTC gave about racially biased 'AI' would fall well under the second clause.
    - dcow 4y ago
      Not a lawyer either, but take a look at this one's definition of "in or affecting commerce" under the Business Activities, Sometimes section: http://www.stephenson-law.com/news/“-or-affecting-commerce”-initial-hurdle-unfair-and-deceptive-trade-practices-claim http://www.stephenson-law.com/news/“-or-affecting-commerce”-... > The proper inquiry is not whether a contractual relationship existed between the parties, but rather whether the defendant’s allegedly deceptive acts affected commerce. I'm really not sure that "gave different demographics of users different responses to optimize product satisfaction" is considered in any way an "unfair or deceptive" practice "in or affecting commerce".
      - genocidicbunny 4y ago
        > I'm really not sure that "gave different demographics of users different responses to optimize product satisfaction" is considered in any way an "unfair or deceptive" practice "in or affecting commerce". Replace 'product satisfaction' with ARPU and suddenly it could very well be. Charging users different amounts, even if it only appears that it might be racially biased, would be a great way to invite more scrutiny. Ultimately, I figure the FTC probably has a few lawyers on staff, and they probably ran these messages past at least one of them. So they're probably a little more certain of the soundness of the messages than us armchair lawyers.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
O__________O 4y ago
Suggest you read the link they provided, since they clearly to have legal authority over these topics as defined by US legal code: https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2021/04/aiming-truth-fairness-equity-your-companys-use-ai https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2021/04/aiming-tr...
- dcow 4y ago
  Can you link me to the text of the FTC Act that backs the claims made in the article that the FTC has authority over unfair consumer "algorithms"? They are quite editorialized. I responded in a sibling comment to someone saying the same thing. The only text I can find in the FTC act is related to unfair business practices with respect to competition against other businesses. Not "biased algorithms".
  - O__________O 4y ago
    Did you even read “Section 5 of the FTC Act” since to me it’s as simple if you’re willfully ignoring information you already have: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45
    - dcow 4y ago
      Which part of this: > Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful. applies to an "inequitable AI algorithm"? I'm really serious, this section talks about unfair competition between businesses and unfairly or deceptively affecting commerce. Here's a lawyers definition of "in or affecting commerce": http://www.stephenson-law.com/news/“-or-affecting-commerce”-initial-hurdle-unfair-and-deceptive-trade-practices-claim http://www.stephenson-law.com/news/“-or-affecting-commerce”-... Specifically, it's not illegal to make a product that treats people unfairly. But it's illegal to treat people unfairly in commerce. My reading of that is that if I offer my shitbot to you fairly and non-deceptively, and it treats you poorly, that's not the FTCs concern.
thomastjeffery 4y ago
That, as the article clearly lays out, is a separate but closely related subject. It's a concern founded on the same common misconceptions about AI that they are talking about here. Machine learning models are not well equipped to handle the issues of prejudice or fairness, because those are, in the most literal sense, subjective. Machine learning models as a feature do not interact with subjects. Subjects are too computationally hard, so they were optimized out instead. As a latent result, any behavior implemented with machine learning models must be carefully curated, otherwise subjective patterns like prejudice and groupthink will pollute the model. This is a trivially predictable continuation of prejudice as a language feature: it's functionally much easier to generate a continuation out of a biased circular position than it is to generate one that includes objective consideration. In fact, objectivity itself is a feature that has not been implemented yet in any AI software. Prejudice, on the other hand, is so easy to implement that it happens by accident.
creatonez 4y ago
If you're looking for the actual basis for this, that would be the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act, and all of the numerous ways in which these doctrines are required to permeate how the executive branch protects citizens against many forms of discrimination. The US has sweeping anti-discrimination laws, and they apply to private business too. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who has learned about US history.

by dcow 4y ago

genocidicbunny 4y ago

If you actually go read the linked article, it's pretty clearly spelled out: The FTC has decades of experience enforcing three laws important to developers and users of AI: Section 5 of the FTC Act. The FTC Act prohibits unfair or deceptive practices. That would include the sale or use of – for example – racially biased algorithms. Fair Credit Reporting Act. The FCRA comes into play in certain circumstances where an algorithm is used to deny people employment, housing, credit, insurance, or other benefits. Equal Credit Opportunity Act. The ECOA makes it illegal for a company to use a biased algorithm that results in credit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or because a person receives public assistance. Seems pretty clear cut to me that they're saying you can't use the 'but the AI did it' excuse if the net result is that your product is violating these.

dcow 4y ago
If you actually go read the FTC act, section 5 is about preventing unfair methods of competition. It's massive stretch to interpret that as "deploying an unfair consumer algorithm".
- genocidicbunny 4y ago
  You missed the second half of 15 USC § 45.a.1: (1) Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful. Now, IANAL, but it seems to me that the example the FTC gave about racially biased 'AI' would fall well under the second clause.
  - dcow 4y ago
    Not a lawyer either, but take a look at this one's definition of "in or affecting commerce" under the Business Activities, Sometimes section: http://www.stephenson-law.com/news/“-or-affecting-commerce”-initial-hurdle-unfair-and-deceptive-trade-practices-claim http://www.stephenson-law.com/news/“-or-affecting-commerce”-... > The proper inquiry is not whether a contractual relationship existed between the parties, but rather whether the defendant’s allegedly deceptive acts affected commerce. I'm really not sure that "gave different demographics of users different responses to optimize product satisfaction" is considered in any way an "unfair or deceptive" practice "in or affecting commerce".
    - genocidicbunny 4y ago
      > I'm really not sure that "gave different demographics of users different responses to optimize product satisfaction" is considered in any way an "unfair or deceptive" practice "in or affecting commerce". Replace 'product satisfaction' with ARPU and suddenly it could very well be. Charging users different amounts, even if it only appears that it might be racially biased, would be a great way to invite more scrutiny. Ultimately, I figure the FTC probably has a few lawyers on staff, and they probably ran these messages past at least one of them. So they're probably a little more certain of the soundness of the messages than us armchair lawyers.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

O__________O 4y ago

Suggest you read the link they provided, since they clearly to have legal authority over these topics as defined by US legal code: https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2021/04/aiming-truth-fairness-equity-your-companys-use-ai https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2021/04/aiming-tr...

dcow 4y ago
Can you link me to the text of the FTC Act that backs the claims made in the article that the FTC has authority over unfair consumer "algorithms"? They are quite editorialized. I responded in a sibling comment to someone saying the same thing. The only text I can find in the FTC act is related to unfair business practices with respect to competition against other businesses. Not "biased algorithms".
- O__________O 4y ago
  Did you even read “Section 5 of the FTC Act” since to me it’s as simple if you’re willfully ignoring information you already have: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45
  - dcow 4y ago
    Which part of this: > Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful. applies to an "inequitable AI algorithm"? I'm really serious, this section talks about unfair competition between businesses and unfairly or deceptively affecting commerce. Here's a lawyers definition of "in or affecting commerce": http://www.stephenson-law.com/news/“-or-affecting-commerce”-initial-hurdle-unfair-and-deceptive-trade-practices-claim http://www.stephenson-law.com/news/“-or-affecting-commerce”-... Specifically, it's not illegal to make a product that treats people unfairly. But it's illegal to treat people unfairly in commerce. My reading of that is that if I offer my shitbot to you fairly and non-deceptively, and it treats you poorly, that's not the FTCs concern.

thomastjeffery 4y ago

That, as the article clearly lays out, is a separate but closely related subject. It's a concern founded on the same common misconceptions about AI that they are talking about here. Machine learning models are not well equipped to handle the issues of prejudice or fairness, because those are, in the most literal sense, subjective. Machine learning models as a feature do not interact with subjects. Subjects are too computationally hard, so they were optimized out instead. As a latent result, any behavior implemented with machine learning models must be carefully curated, otherwise subjective patterns like prejudice and groupthink will pollute the model. This is a trivially predictable continuation of prejudice as a language feature: it's functionally much easier to generate a continuation out of a biased circular position than it is to generate one that includes objective consideration. In fact, objectivity itself is a feature that has not been implemented yet in any AI software. Prejudice, on the other hand, is so easy to implement that it happens by accident.

creatonez 4y ago

If you're looking for the actual basis for this, that would be the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act, and all of the numerous ways in which these doctrines are required to permeate how the executive branch protects citizens against many forms of discrimination. The US has sweeping anti-discrimination laws, and they apply to private business too. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who has learned about US history.