News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI by ethbr0 on Sunday March 05, 2023 @07:12PM (#35035779)
The problem with black boxes is that they beg parallel construction theories.

I.e. "We don't approve loans to {ethnic majority} on purpose. We only use our models, which only rely on historical data." -> No proof, no case, no problem

The point of any AI law should be to put the onus on the model executor to explain how their model doesn't violate existing law.

You can use any model you want, but you can't point to its unexplainability as a free pass for ignoring protected classes.

And if you can't explain its results? Well, then you're opening yourself up to lawsuits.

Re:ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI by thrashh on Monday March 06, 2023 @01:20AM (#35038057)
Companies can already do that without AI. Why would you legislate just AI and let some other company discriminate?
Re:ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI by ruszki on Monday March 06, 2023 @01:36AM (#35038125)
Why do you think they would let?
Re:ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI by warrenronsiek on Monday March 06, 2023 @10:35AM (#35042235)
So ML systems are guilty until they can prove themselves innocent?

Requiring the claimant have some evidence might not be a perfect legal regime, but the converse is a de-facto ban on innovation.

Can a human _prove_ that their decisions are made without bias? No. Are we going to hold them to the same standard proposed here for an AI? Also no. In practice, rules like the one proposed here just enshrine legacy decision systems which are already understood to biased and ineffective.

The most mysterious black box we have is the human brain.

Re:ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI by ethbr0 on Tuesday March 07, 2023 @07:55AM (#35054774)
A fair point.

What would you say of requiring training data and hyperparameter archiving for subsequent legal review?