If the ImageNet contains bias that leads to embarrassing results- that’s fine! That give us a readily available toy instance of the problem to study. Taking that away could actively harm anti-bias research.
If the ImageNet contains bias that leads to embarrassing results- that’s fine! That give us a readily available toy instance of the problem to study. Taking that away could actively harm anti-bias research.
I don't want the appearance of fairness (introduced by human dataset curation) to be mistaken for "intelligence".
Keeping the bias would hopefully cause people to think more critically about why such bias exists in the model in the first place.
I'm just saying that model bias is a very easy thing to explain (usually, data imbalance).
You can also fiddle with the label ratios to change the bias - which is also a good way of showing that the models aren't really intelligent.
If a data set is flawed, it should be fixed, but when ML finds objective patterns our culture finds subjectively unpalatable and we choose to "fix" them, we fall prey to and re-enact the same grade of self-delusion exhibited by, for example, "the church" in the dark ages. Computer science is already low in terms of accountability & rigor compared to other fields without these kinds of suggestions.
This isn't a thing and you should read more about what you think happened in this period of western history.
For example: black men in the US are more likely than white men to have criminal records, but this in no way means that black men are "objectively" more criminal.
To paraphrase Warren Buffet: "If a cop follows you for 500 miles, they're going to find a reason to give you a ticket."
If your life is a cesspit and you can count on the authorities to be part of the problem, where does murder end and self defense begin?
See the song "I shot the sheriff." I'm most familiar with the Eric Clapton version, but googling it recently suggests to me it was originally written by Bob Marley.
There are plenty of dead bodies with holes in their heads, but it's not clear how one accounts for crime among those 7800 dead.
How does overpolicing explain both arrest for murder rate and victim of murder rate have a significantly higher prevalence within black community?
I have a feeling most of you went to white schools or lived in white areas instead of black ones in bad places. Most in my area that went to the latter, including black folks, know where this comes from. I already described it here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20660278
You folks need to stop just dismissing all blame on the black side as "cops must just always make stuff up or police them harder." There's plenty of that worth calling out. However, the biggest hole in your argument is murder in high numbers. You can watch folks that don't kill people or who get shot all day in whatever selective way you want. In the end for poor neighborhoods, the black ones you watch will have committed many more murders hitting many more black victims than the white ones.
And, if gangs are involved, the dealers and killers will often be told they're in for life. They'll be perpetuating it in a way that has nothing to do with white people. And you should be calling them out hard on that if you really care about thugs getting arrested by cops and/or protecting their victims which are mostly black. Instead, it's whites (damage of some kind) blacks non-stop in your comments or the media vs thug culture from blacks murdering black people all the time. And, it seems, something like that with machismo and cartels in Latino areas. I have less experience with them, though. I didn't get to since we had to leave the neighborhood after a small confrontation led to one putting a contract on our heads that canceled (maybe) if we moved.
So, I'm calling bullshit unless you're saying there's both racist over-policing by cops (mostly but not all white) and thug culture coming from blacks creating killers that take out tons of blacks blacks. Something similar for Latino areas. Then, it fits the data.