News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on City of Amsterdam’s Algorithm Register. Parent comment

Re:City of Amsterdam’s Algorithm Register by read_if_gay_ on Wednesday September 30, 2020 @05:50AM (#24637029)
> I wouldn't be surprised to see a future where all ML applications affecting citizens and the general public interest (excluding defense, military, etc.) will be obliged to be open-source and subject to public scrutiny.

I would be positively surprised.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:City of Amsterdam’s Algorithm Register by anddt on Wednesday September 30, 2020 @07:52AM (#24637763)
Sorry if it didn't come across in the post, it'd be no doubt a fair step towards more ethically sound governments.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:City of Amsterdam’s Algorithm Register by bettem on Wednesday September 30, 2020 @08:17AM (#24637958)
In Australia, any Federal Government algorithm can be FOI’d by a member of the public. It’s one of the reasons the Aus Federal Government statisticians tend away from black box AI and towards more traditional methods.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:City of Amsterdam’s Algorithm Register by anddt on Wednesday September 30, 2020 @08:28AM (#24638054)
> [...] Government statisticians tend away from black box AI and towards more traditional methods.

I was indeed wondering how constraints on model interpretation forces governments to stay away from NN and more complex approaches.

I have worked for a fraud-prevention company for a few years, and the financial nature of the decisions involved led to reward model interpretation (sometime at accuracy's expense) in order not to create friction with clients. Definitely not the best not being able to explain why your model performs poorly or what actions are needed to solve a problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]