| What I took from the article were a few points: * Taking a neutral position when building something (its just a tool, it's making decisions based on an aggregate) IS in fact making a decision. State can be -1, 0, or 1 and neutrality yields a certain result. * The local optima of these algorithms are likely a product of local optima to the people and teams who built them. The neutral position seemed like the correct answer. * These articles serve to reinforce the idea that the next frontier is context within algorithmic results. This global optimum can only be achieved through diversity of perspective. Perspectives are a product of one's experience, so the value of diversity can be directly connected to the goal of desiring a optimum solution towards a hard problem. FWIW, I am a black heterosexual engineer and my experiences inform my perspective on these type of problems and blindspots affecting people not like me, especially women. For those wanting to go deeper on the technical, scientific, and mathematical basis for what I'm referring, google 'diversity local optima'. |
Males searching for “FOOBAR girls” have, on average, different intent than women. If they represent the majority of searches, algorithms will naturally weigh the results they click more highly.
Hyper personalization is seen as an answer, but comes with the downside of a reinforcing bubble and drift to extremes. Human intervention and editing are only a partial solution, bringing up further questions about censorship and which ideology is correct.
No easy answers to all of this.