Re:AI Explorables: big ideas in machine learning, simply exp...
by nerdponx on Tuesday July 06, 2021 @01:13AM
(#27744461)
> I'm really surprised that most of the top level comments are so negative.
Lots of throwaway accounts here, and the comments are clearly written by people who aren't professionals in this field. Just downvote them and move on.
> Does your insurance company require certain fairness metrics be deployed to maintain your product or service policy coverage? Will your company pursue tax incentives that focus on certain definitions of unbiasedness?
These are scary thoughts. If this kind of policy does come to pass, I fear it would backfire significantly, basically making any machine learning (let alone "AI") a serious legal liability. Imagine world in which companies no longer want to hire data scientists of the regulatory risk of even having one on staff!
There's an argument to be made that a bit of ML liability is a good thing, that important decisions shouldn't be made by machine. I'm tempted to agree in most cases. But encoding it into regulation will be extremely difficult, even if you have truly pure and noble intentions, without making a giant mess. And that's before you realize that, obviously, major "AI powers" like Google, Facebook, etc. could have been working on this for years, and as soon as it's ready for production they will start lobbying aggressively for it, in order to further monopolize the ML/AI field.
Also, do the machines actually perform worse (i.e. "more biased") than underpaid humans who are prone to fatique, mistakes, and laziness?
Lots of throwaway accounts here, and the comments are clearly written by people who aren't professionals in this field. Just downvote them and move on.
> Does your insurance company require certain fairness metrics be deployed to maintain your product or service policy coverage? Will your company pursue tax incentives that focus on certain definitions of unbiasedness?
These are scary thoughts. If this kind of policy does come to pass, I fear it would backfire significantly, basically making any machine learning (let alone "AI") a serious legal liability. Imagine world in which companies no longer want to hire data scientists of the regulatory risk of even having one on staff!
There's an argument to be made that a bit of ML liability is a good thing, that important decisions shouldn't be made by machine. I'm tempted to agree in most cases. But encoding it into regulation will be extremely difficult, even if you have truly pure and noble intentions, without making a giant mess. And that's before you realize that, obviously, major "AI powers" like Google, Facebook, etc. could have been working on this for years, and as soon as it's ready for production they will start lobbying aggressively for it, in order to further monopolize the ML/AI field.
Also, do the machines actually perform worse (i.e. "more biased") than underpaid humans who are prone to fatique, mistakes, and laziness?