In that paper it sounds like the algorithm is finding true relationships that the author doesn't like. What's the problem with the algorithm?
I don't understand what you mean by "the algorithm" or "true relationships".
Do you know what I mean? There's truth as in what the data says, and there's truth as in what's underlying before social processes " corrupt " the truth. This paper examines ways to get at the latent truth.
Do you think that's a useful endeavor? It's dismissive to say it has anything to do with what the "author likes".
> and there's truth as in what's underlying before social processes " corrupt " the truth.
Ah, so you're defining "truth" as "whatever I imagine the world would be like if society worked the way I wished it did". There's another word for that; "fantasy".
And the bias people are probably talking about is bias in the data, not bias in the "input", as you put it.
See http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06520 for a counterexample to your point.