biasedbrain

You can compare women doing competitive sports with men doing the same. They will both have an optimized diet and so on.

Perhaps you could get some women to a similar level as men by giving them hormones from an early age (I don't know), but even then I think it would be a stretch to say "see, it is all cultural, we are denying those girls their hormones".

If an elderly person will cost your insurance more than a younger person, the ML should tell you so. Period.

If by policy you should be forced to still give them the same conditions, that should be decided on a different level, not at the level of the tool that analyzes your data.

As I said, these SJWs and "AI ethics" researchers have not invented the idea of minimizing the number of mistakes ML systems make.

Yes, you can point out that perhaps a data set is missing some black faces, but that should be a minor bug entry in the bug tracker, not a million dollar industry getting people PhDs.

And "those people" are not stopping at providing better data sets, they want to introduce their own political bias into the system, literally creating a distorted view of the world. As I said, this is serious stuff, if you assume most people will perceive the world via Google searches.

Maybe the issue here is "known problems" - this is not about "known problems", it is about a specific ideology that makes them believe they "know" what causes certain problems. As a simplified example, they want to make the AI "not see color" and think that will make the problems go away. Forcing the AI (and in turn the people who use it) to not see color is totalitarian control and wrong.

Decision making is an issue, but that needs to be addressed at the human level, not in the tools that are being used to perceive the world.

If you AI discovers that women historically have been worse hires for your company (or people doing the hiring thought they were worse), the correct response is not to introduce some artificial bias in the ML to ignore gender or inflate the scores for women. It is to try to figure out what has been going on, and to make up your mind what you actually want.

You should be allowed to think and perceive and notice things, and use tools to help you do so. It is ridiculous to mandate algorithms should be modified to hide statistical facts about the world.

by all means, educate people that just because some population is perhaps on average more criminal, it doesn't imply any individual belonging to that population is also more criminal.

To hide the statistics would also hurt efforts to find solutions. That can not be a good thing.

Edit: if you don't like the criminal example, what about noticing some populations are on average poorer than others? Would that be a good thing, because government money could be diverted their way, or a bad thing, because banks would be less inclined to lend them money, and landlords would be less likely to rent them a home?

These are now the "big ideas" in machine learning? I guess they have given up on AGI then?

In my book, this AI diversity nonsense is not even AI research. The SJWs pretend they discovered the concept of bias, when it has always been a core part of Machine Learning from the beginning.

Even more concerning, it is an attempt to permanently encode their distorted sense of reality in AI models that affect billions of people. This needs to be fought, not celebrated.