Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
Katherine Ye
Today, published an exposé by Rodrigo Ochigame (a PhD candidate at MIT) on the invention of "ethical AI" by big tech. Here's why I think it's important to read this piece and share it widely. 1/
A Silicon Valley lobby enrolled elite academia to avoid legal restrictions on artificial intelligence.
The Intercept The Intercept @theintercept
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se" More
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
Like many computer science researchers, I watched with confusion as the field of "fairness, accountability, transparency, and ethics in artificial intelligence" (FATE) was swiftly birthed in 2017. 2/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
I don't work in the area, but I work adjacent to it. In the summer of 2017, I interned at Google Brain on visualizing machine learning. I saw FATE-focused initiatives, institutes, partnerships, and nonprofits spring up at major institutions after that summer. 3/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
I saw many well-intentioned early grad students, as well as many senior faculty looking for a new cause, sucked into working in "ethics in AI." Why was everyone all of a sudden working on this stuff? 4/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
Given that algorithmic injustice has existed since, perhaps, the dawn of computing, I didn't think American computer science academics had suddenly started caring en masse—nor that algorithmic injustice was simply another "technical problem" that academics could solve. 5/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
Regardless, in the last three years, work done under the aegis of promoting "fairness, accountability, transparency, and ethics" has become enormously influential in setting big tech and US policy agendas. 6/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
Today, we find out that the language of "AI ethics" has been a smokescreen for corporate lobbying. Big tech groomed academia to develop technical self-regulations to avoid legal regulation. Why? Profit. Read Rodrigo's exposé for the receipts. 7/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
Seriously, you won't find this amount of dishing anywhere else. Where few others would dare, Rodrigo has bravely come forth to illuminate the collusion between corporate, academic, and military pushers of "ethical AI." 8/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
Do you care about how corporate profit agendas shape the research, policymaking, and national conversations around the software that governs your life and that is deployed against enemies of the state? Read this piece. 9/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
This piece is a great counterpoint to the argument of technological determinism: "If we don't build it, someone else will." Perhaps interrogate who planted the thought that "it," whatever technology, was worth building in the first place? 10/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
Finally: this is not new! In the 1970s and 80s, the US private insurance industry invented the idea of "actuarial fairness" to protect itself from charges of discrimination by activists and evade legal regulation, as Ochigame et al. have written earlier. Sound familiar? 11/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 20. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @hypotext
For more, check out their paper "Beyond Legitimation: Rethinking Fairness, Interpretability, and Accuracy in Machine Learning": 12/
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 21. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @rg9119
Important note (via ):
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 21. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @rg9119
I boosted this piece because it rings true with my + friends' experiences in CS academia & bc it starts an important conversation about influence + ideas. But I think it's important to note the tension b/t the author's intent with the piece and the impact it may actually have.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 21. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @fredbenenson
Seconding 's point that this is a complicated take, and to center voices from folks with other lived experiences in the conversation.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 21. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @fredbenenson
A friend in the FAT* community adds that they think the piece flattens complex issues around incrementalism vs reform in the field, but that it's hard to have a public conversation about the field's struggles with power, because it requires disclosing even more insider knowledge.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 22. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @fredbenenson @gleemie
Lots of complicated conversations happening now around this piece. I want to second 's call to center grassroots orgs that are led by the folks who are most affected by algorithmic injustice—as the writer does!
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Katherine Ye 22. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @fredbenenson @gleemie
And to focus on the structural forces at work in shaping the discourse around "ethics in AI."
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"