Technology

59429 readers

2885 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1017

"We're nowhere near the point where an AI can do your job, but we're well past the point where your boss can be suckered into firing you and replacing you with a bot that fails at doing your job." (Pl (pluralistic.net)

submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

87 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think with a human operator, we can be proactive. A person can be informed of bias, learn to recognize it, and even attempt to compensate for their own.

An AI model is working off of aggregate past data that we already know is biased. There is currently no proactive anti bias training that can be done to a AI model without massively altering the dataset, which, at some level of alteration, loses its value as true to life data.

Secondly, AI is a black box. we can’t see inner the workings of the model and determine what types of associations it is making to come to its result. So we don’t even know what part of the dataset would need to be altered to address the bias.

Lastly, the default assumption by end users will be, unless there are glaring defects, that any individual result is correct and unbiased, because “AI was made by smart people and data, and data doesn’t lie.” And because interrogating and validating the result defeats the whole purpose of using AI to cut out those steps of the process.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

I think with a human operator, we can be proactive. A person can be informed of bias, learn to recognize it, and even attempt to compensate for their own.

I think you're being very optimistic here. I hope very much that you'd be right about the humans. I have a feeling that a lot of these type of decisions are also resulting from implicit biases in humans that these humans themselves might not even recognize or acknowledge. Few sexists or racists will admit to being racists or sexists.

I agree about your point about the "computer says no" issue. That's also addressed in the video and fits well into her wider point that large parts of the population not understanding how so-called AI works is a huge problem.