[tpllaha]

Right... But isn't "judgement before actual evidence" all ML algorithms do? They try to statistically evaluate something about a set's members based on other features, because actual evidence of what we want to find out is missing. In my opinion this means that we either: 1) ignore the problem during the algorithm design phase and analyze the output with caution, or 2) decide that any statistical classification of human beings is "unfair" or even illegal (because it will have to discriminate people based on some properties that we know about them - be it race, or height or whatever) I don't see any middle-ground, since "prejudice" in my opinion is an unavoidable effect of ML algorithms as we know them.

[myrryr]

In many respects all ML does is evaluate all the evidence before it. It cuts both ways.