News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A machine learning approach to identifying thought markers of suicidal subjects. Parent comment

Re:A machine learning approach to identifying thought marker... by golergka on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @08:41AM (#12900106)
But humans already make those judgements, and when they make errors, it's tragic too. If a psychologist erroneously decides that you're a menace to yourself and should be institutionalized, would it make you feel better that it was a human that made this decision? Even if AI would make the same error with a much lower probability?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A machine learning approach to identifying thought marker... by oelmekki on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @09:38AM (#12900540)
This is a good point. I guess the difference here will be "how much do we trust human judgement?" and "how much do we trust AI predictions?". If AIs make 10% less errors than humans but we have 50% more trust in them, that's a problem. Eugenics were not a problem because science was wrong, but because people blindly trusted it to apply where it should not.

There are a lot of things to consider, here, those are exciting times for thinking.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A machine learning approach to identifying thought marker... by tomjen3 on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @01:57PM (#12902919)
I can't speak for OP, but that is one reason I want to end all involuntary treatments. Getting locked up in a psych facility is a nightmare to me.

But you can at least sue a doctor and get his license revoked. It is much harder to sue an algorithm.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A machine learning approach to identifying thought marker... by golergka on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @02:19PM (#12903112)
> I want to end all involuntary treatments

Are you sure you have thought through all implications? I mean, getting locked up sounds pretty scary, but there are a lot of other scary stories that can happen if you really ban the whole concept of involuntary treatments.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A machine learning approach to identifying thought marker... by kec on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @01:46PM (#12902835)
The concern isn't the lack of humanity, it's technology allowing for massive scale. The potential damage of a buggy machine learning classifier is much higher than that of an unskilled psychologist.
[ Parent | on HN ]