Hacker News Reader

Comment by Kaveren | Hacker News Reader

> "So I think we need something like the FDA for algorithms."

I can't say for sure that the author or interviewee even knows what the definition of an algorithm is.

No, the government absolutely should not be involved in regulating algorithms. You'll be able to enjoy a burdensome system for anyone that isn't a massive corporation. Good luck competing against Google when every 10 lines of code you write, you need to seek government approval.

I know you're not supposed to be dismissive on Hacker News, but it's so difficult to take this seriously when you display this level of technical ignorance.

View on HN

Unchecked algorithms at scale have already had a significant and often detrimental impact on society.

A solution is to break up and/or regulate FAANG sufficiently such that algorithmic regulations do not impede David’s from reasonably competing.

Or, such regulations could also be targeted at bigger players past a certain size, and not apply as strictly to smaller scale applications. It is the broad scale application of an algorithm that often facilitates its ability to be effective, after all.

Alternatively, we could stop pushing for government regulation of absolutely everything considerably possible. The desired culture of micromanagement is not productive.

The phrase "unchecked algorithms at scale" does not mean anything, it's just written to look scary.

Now the discussion of breaking up (or regulating) tech companies appears to have expanded to Apple and Netflix (re: FAANG) for some reason.

Do you have an example of 'an unchecked algorithm at scale'?

Your Facebook news feed?

AFAIK, no one else outside of people working at Facebook can see how the algorithm decides what should be on top of your feed.

>I can't say for sure that the author or interviewee even knows what the definition of an algorithm is.

I feel confident that the author has also not gone through an FDA approval process. My wife works in regulatory affairs for a medium sized pharma. There are a lot of hoops to jump through, egos to stroke, and huge costs involved. Want to blow a few weeks and a couple $million because a picture in an ad might be showing someone smiling too much (you can't imply a drug will make you too happy unless is indicated for such), go to the FDA. Don't get me wrong, the FDA exists for a reason, and is far, far better than not having oversight.

Even if (beyond all logic) a reasonable case could be made for government oversight, the FDA is the wrong model.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com