3 ms·
So you don’t care about the inequalities that it can create or reinforce as a result? Since it wasn’t the intention of the creators, just a limitation of their
by soneca 3y ago
So you don’t care about the inequalities that it can create or reinforce as a result? Since it wasn’t the intention of the creators, just a limitation of their resources, we should accept and don’t complain if it generates undesired externalities?
- janalsncm 3y ago> just a limitation of their resources I think even this is too generous. These “detectors” are claiming to do something which is impossible from a technical sense. You can’t calculate perplexity without knowing the prior probability distribution, and you can’t know that without knowing which model was used. They’re playing a dangerous game where the consequences for being wrong (which will be borne by innocent 3rd parties) can be extremely dire.
- gavaw 3y agoNon-native English speakers have produced less content in English on the Internet (despite having it easier, since we outnumber native English speakers) and as a result our content is underrepresented. Isn't this the definition of "fucking fair"?
- soneca 3y agoObviously not a sufficient argument for it to be “fucking fair”. If the consequences of using such technology “overharm” populations underrepresented in the data, it is obviously not fair. Even election polls correct bias due to underrepresented populations among the responders.