Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Keep your AI claims in check

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 308 posts

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#41

Post by uoaei »

flatline wrote: post #36

“It’s an ambiguous term with many possible definitions.” “Does the product actually use AI at all? If you think you can get away with baseless claims…” Last I checked basic optimization techniques like simulated annealing and gradient descent - as well as a host of basic statistical tools - are standard parts of an introductory AI textbook. I’ve been on the receiving end of government agency enforcement (SEC) and it…

I think we can safely assume techniques with analytical solutions computable in polynomial time are neither ML nor AI.

Linear regression is an important part of statistics but is still ultimately a couple matmuls and a matrix inversion in its basic form.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#43

Post by mr_toad »

calr wrote: post #22
IncRnd wrote: post #13

Are you aware of the risks? You need to know about the reasonably foreseeable risks and impact of your AI product before putting it on the market. If something goes wrong – maybe it fails or yields biased results – you can’t just blame a third-party developer of the technology. And you can’t say you’re not responsible because that technology is a “black box” you can’t understand or didn’t know how to test. I'm remind…

Ignorance of your "black box" excuses not

> Ignorance of your "black box" excuses not

Hopefully the FTC understands linear separability. Because I often get the impression that people who want ML models to be explicable don’t, and are expecting the mathematically impossible.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#44

Post by atlasunshrugged »

yarone wrote: post #27
dylan604 wrote: post #4

wow, i would not have imagined a gov't agency to be agile enough to release something like this. i'm kind of impressed. here's to hoping this isn't just all bark and there's some actual teeth to his.

I had the same thought! Then, my next thought was: Who (in industry) wrote this? (and got FTC to publish it? wanting to drive some agenda forward).

It's not always industry, sometimes agencies are closer to academia, certain types of lawyers (maybe this is considered industry too), etc. But seems in line with Lina Khan's efforts

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#45

Post by orlp »

ElijahLynn wrote: post #37
vorticalbox wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plot twist chstGPT wrote it lol

I went ahead and put in this prompt to ChatGPT ( https://chat.openai.com/chat ): ==================== > Write a press release from the FTC that warns companies to be careful of promises using "AI". ==================== FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FTC Warns Companies to be Careful of Promises using "AI" Washington, D.C. - The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is warning companies that use artificial intelligence (AI) to be car…

For once the URL is actually working!

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#46

Post by butterguns »

adav wrote: post #19
aiappreciator wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its incredible. The language is not bureaucratic, its elegant, precise, and clear. Like written by a passionate person who cares about the topic, rather than a government drone.

Perhaps a little too elegant, precise, and clear... wouldn't it be deliciously ironic if this blog was written by chatgpt?

In my experience, chatgpt is incredibly wordy / verbose. This doesn't read as chatgpt output at all.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#49

Post by Oxidation »

reaperducer wrote: post #34
IncRnd wrote: post #13

Are you aware of the risks? You need to know about the reasonably foreseeable risks and impact of your AI product before putting it on the market. If something goes wrong – maybe it fails or yields biased results – you can’t just blame a third-party developer of the technology. And you can’t say you’re not responsible because that technology is a “black box” you can’t understand or didn’t know how to test. I'm remind…

Good job, FTC Hopefully it goes after some people. I once worked for a founder who was running afoul off some FTC regulations. When the team brought it to his attention, he claimed to have never heard of the FTC. When we explained what the FTC is, he started arguing with us saying it had no authority over him, and he'll make the decisions for his business. Money really does make some people crazy.

Are you sure that wasn't Grimes' ex and the SEC?

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#50

Post by Vespasian »

Oxidation wrote: post #21
imaurer wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do "IF-THEN" statements count as AI? Do rules-based expert systems count?

I imagine we'll be seeing a few cases setting that precedent in the next 10 years, and it's likely that the kind of "aha I said finger, a thumb isn't a finger, so I win" argument favoured by sovereign citizens, 5-year-olds and techbros who think they're smarter than everyone else will go over as well as it usually does.

At the height of the Smart Contract hype I used to bring arguments like these as an example why automating justice is not something you want to do.

Generation after Generation of fresh "sovereign citizens, 5-year olds and techbros" is surprised that judges are in fact allowed to use life experience and common sense before making a decision.

"Not guilty because of a technicality" is usually reserved for TV.

Post reply on HN