[sgt101]

>There is no such thing as a dangerous book or a dangerous ML model.

ML models that discriminate against women and black people seem self evidently dangerous to me; who has done wrong here?

Also ML models that are inadequately designed and tested and then mooted as useful for medical applications seem dangerous to - like drugs that aren't tested before being given to infants.

I just don't understand your reasoning about this - if books can't be dangerous then why are they so powerful? If ML models can't be dangerous then how can they have utility?

[AllegedAlec]

> If ML models can't be dangerous then how can they have utility?

> Something can only have utility if it's dangerous.

smh

> ML models that discriminate against women and black people seem self evidently dangerous to me; who has done wrong here?

> Also ML models that are inadequately designed and tested and then mooted as useful for medical applications seem dangerous to - like drugs that aren't tested before being given to infants.

Whoever decided to take the results of that model and directly translate what it says into actions without any further thought.