|
|
|
|
|
|
by bionsuba
3358 days ago
|
|
|
First off, this isn't AI, it's machine learning. > The idea of AI picking up the biases within the language texts it trained on may not sound like an earth-shattering revelation That's an understatement. > But the study helps put the nail in the coffin of the old argument about AI automatically being more objective than humans Again, this isn't AI, and anyone with knowledge on the subject has always known that a traditional machine learning algorithm is only as good as its training data. This also seems like a case where the researchers are simply unhappy with the results they received, rather than being able to show that the results are wrong. |
|
|
Yes, everyone "in the know" knows that there's no such thing as "AI" right now, and what we actually have are just statistical models with "bias in, bias out". To us, this news is not surprising.
But that's not how these algorithms are being marketed, hyped, and sold, or how their decisions are being justified. Right now there's a lot of people selling "AI" as an unbiased and better decision-maker than humans. Where this gets really bad is when they start justifying the biased decisions of the machines as, "it's an AI program, so this can't be bias: whatever icky things it decided must be the truth!". That's the real worry here: when the marketing- and hence the policy- doesn't match the reality, and starts amplifying and reinforcing the very problems it was supposed to solve.