[fearingreprisal]

I feel my interpretation differs at:

> "...I don't see any ethical obligation to use "unbiased" datasets for pure research or tinkering with models..."

I don't think his comment was addressing the larger ethical discussion at all. I didn't interpret it as a discussion of ethical responsibilities, rather a strictly technical, matter-of-fact statement about the nature of ML training.

Please don't interpret my comment as an attack on yours, it was more pointing out I interpreted his statement differently.

[nmfisher]

I guess I see your view and my view as two sides of the same coin - that “research ethics” is different from “application ethics”. I inferred that view from the following exchange:

Twitter user: “ML researchers need to be more careful selecting their data so that they don't encode biases like this.”

YLC: “Not so much ML researchers but ML engineers. The consequences of bias are considerably more dire in a deployed product than in an academic paper.”

Perhaps I’m wrong. That’s the whole problem with Twitter though - you can’t convey much nuance or sophistication in 140 characters.