3 ms·
This is such an excellent way of concisely expressing a major fallacy I see whenever I talk about AI/modeling/etc. (I.e. “it isn’t racist it’s just numbers” and
by Forgeties79 3y ago
This is such an excellent way of concisely expressing a major fallacy I see whenever I talk about AI/modeling/etc. (I.e. “it isn’t racist it’s just numbers” and other nonsensical takes). I’m borrowing this language for the future.
- sdenton4 3y agoMeanwhile, human judges, juries, parole boards, etc are racist as hell and have no update algorithm...
- hooverd 3y agoThat's a hopefully fixable organization problem. I think the closest we should let AI get to judicial decisions is suggested ranges. There still needs to be a person a decision traces back to, who's not just passing through what the computer says.
- sdenton4 3y agoHa. Human problems never get fixed, just moved around. There's nothing new to help get the racism or of the justice system - a core piece of the problem is that there are only disincentives for mercy and no checks whatsoever on individual biases. We still have a racist system in the US sixty years after the civil rights movement, and I don't see anything changing that anytime soon. Tech problems sometimes get fixed, and occasionally either eliminate a class of human problems or create new ones. It's the only thing that changes... Rejecting tech wholesale means embracing the status quo.
- yodelshady 3y agoThere should absolutely be a human where the buck stops. But... "fixing an organisation" involves calling people racist. Then screwing their careers. That should carry a heavy emotional burden. It should involve anger and pushback. "Some weights in an algorithm are wrong" seems a much less fraught problem.
- melagonster 3y agoand we have had racism algorithm in legal services.
- salawat 3y agoLook up the term of art "mathwashing".