[zevets]

I think this argument fails to understand that purpose of black-box models is to be impossible to understand, as it shields the operator from pre-emptive accountability.

Then, since they are supposedly the 'only way' to provide whatever function the market is 'demanding', then clearly we must abandon any notion of accountability, as this need 'must' be met.

This logic is perhaps most evident in google/facebooks content moderation dilemmas, where both companies refuse to define any sort of non-vague actionable standards about what they censor (or fail to promote) as 1) they can't provide them and 2) they don't want to be held responsible for what they actually are.

Then, as outrage has grown over facebook/google's terrible content moderation and censorship policies, and the need for accountability has grown, both companies have been forced to hire ever more moderators and censors, because the technologies as claimed just don't work well enough.

[bllguo]

I don't think it's worthwhile assuming this level of malice.. Ultimately we choose models that are the most performant. Interpretability is just a nice bonus. I can assure you that I am held accountable for my model performance regardless of whether I can explain its decisions satisfactorily. All the business cares about is whether we're burning or making money.

[psv1]

> purpose of black-box models is to be impossible to understand

This is just outright wrong. And the argument about moderation is completely unrelated.

[dmix]

Sounds more like a useful side effect than anything someone would design on purpose. But that's an interesting point none-the-less.

Occam's razors the easier way to explain the actions of the big guys and their own internal responses to cultural pressures to not allow things they don't like from happening or being tolerated in the world.

[taneq]

Well maybe also because black box models can be applied to a wider range of systems and can help to understand general properties of a class of algorithms. I’m sure it’s mostly all a conspiracy, though.