AI system for granting UK visas is biased, rights groups claim

Data-based AI, rather than being neutral, seems to be a tool for amplifying and extending human bias. Whereas a person might occasionally treat a member of a discriminated against class neutrally, whether by accident, oversight, training, human decency, moral bias or a different form of discrimination - on the other hand, a computer will always do the same thing, and amplify the "people from poor backgrounds are refused entry to places that might increase their wealth".

Police get more arrests where there's more police, so if you use an AI to work out where to send cops, it's going to find you the place your discrimination wants it to.

The modern data-ocracy is just the old eliteocracy with a new coat of paint.

The only claim in the article is that nationality affects the process. In what universe is it wrong to take this into account? For example, the considerations when admitting an American into your country are different than admitting an Azerbaijani. There are linguistic barriers, concerns about self-suffiency based on personal financial resources, and even edge-case concerns like the prevelance of militant groups. There are also unequal costs to the UK to do follow-up investigations in fully modernized countries vs. others, and greater costs to countries with less common official languages, given that the number of staff who are fluent in Azerbaijani is lower than those speaking English, Spanish, French, etc.

And all of this is separate from the objective fact that, on average, a random American will be better educated, more culturally in sync, more able to participate in Civic society, and capable of making a larger net positive contribution economically.

So, it is easier and more beneficial to admit an American, why are we trying ourselves in knots, engaging in humanist handwringing about the fact that the process acknowledges this fact in practice? Immigration isn't welfare.

The goal isn't, or shouldn't be, the welfare of all human beings. It should be the best outcome for the nation whose policy is in question.

In other words, one man's 'bias' is another man's common sense.