Hacker News Reader

The article doesn't really address dealing with "the AI said so" as a justification for action.

Like if we start using AI to do things like populate no fly lists.

One of the advantages of GOFAI, and expert systems in particular, was that their reasoning process was a lot more transparent, and in many cases you could ask them to explain it. Much harder if all you have is dozens of arrays of connexion weights.

Perhaps this is more an exposé of human ability to generate rationalizations for chaotic biological workings of their brains, than it is a failing of neural nets to make rational decisions.

Or sentence convicts.

https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessm...

If you read ProPublica's R script rather than their anecdote-filled news article, you discover the algorithm is accurate (p < 0.001) and unbiased (bias tests had p > 0.05).

https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2016/propublica_is_lying....

Unfortunately an honest title/article "sentencing algorithm is accurate and eliminates racism" wouldn't be viable clickbait, so they decided to ignore their own conclusions.

Honestly, I'd click that. Although I'd probably read the HN comments first, as I would be skeptical.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com