31–40 of 165 posts
The fact that the very foundation of our legal system is fundamentally undemocratic (in the sense that no regular citizen can be reasonably expected to understand it) is starting to bubble up into societal awareness. With everything Trump is doing to destroy the rule of law, and all the potential for technology to help us simplify it, I can only hope that when Trump burns it all down, the people who rebuild will be w…
That's you and I.
In contrast, a shockingly large amount of content is extremely lazy, gut-feeling reaction. Avoiding the work and disappointment of finding out that your hot take is wrong.
And yet, FAANG's somehow get way with employing credentialed psychologists and psychiatrists, to experiment on social media users, for maximizing their various engagement and click metrics. For the scale and impact of non-IRB human psychology research, that one has to be at the very top.
It's easy for people (especially the kinds of people who gravitate towards engineering) to get all worked up about the necessary implications of the regulations as-written. But it's also important to remember that being facings consequences would require
A) The intentional action of either a state prosecutor or an injured private party B) The involvement of a human being as a judge to interpret the facts and applicable rules
When you look at it from that angle, it's obvious why organizations like META just do the research, imho.
The article is about medical research on human subjects. And quickly concedes that a great many technically -need-permission things which you might do are of no actual interest to the gov't. EDIT: The second sentence of the article is - > Like, let’s eat potatoes and see if we lose weight. - which, in the minds of 95% of likely jury members , is not "medical research". Nor, at small scale, of plausible interest to th…
Of no actual interest to the government, unless you are someone that someone in the government wishes to crush. ‘Gosh, Opponent of the Regime, when you wrote your blog entry in 2019 about cutting eggs out of your kids’ diets, that was un-reviewed human research. To jail with you!’
And yet, FAANG's somehow get way with employing credentialed psychologists and psychiatrists, to experiment on social media users, for maximizing their various engagement and click metrics. For the scale and impact of non-IRB human psychology research, that one has to be at the very top.
Note that “this person is a psychologist and is employed by Meta working on user research” is not evidence that supports the statement you made.
I mean tons of retrospective studies are literally "IRB exempt" (and highlighted as such in their methods) where no explicit consent is required or needed. Physicians doing case reviews don't need consent of the patient this work. Doing retrospective analyses for defining clinical phenotypes on patient data that has been aggregated isn't needed either. Collecting clinical MRIs to do deep learning doesn't require an I…
> Collecting clinical MRIs to do deep learning doesn't require an IRB Yes it does, but typically the IRB will waive consent and waive notification for those sorts of studies if the images can be de-identified. There's also HIPAA involved which may or may not require establishing a BAA depending on what's being done if the images can't be de-identified. This is particularly an issue with brain MRI because it is usuall…
The article is about medical research on human subjects. And quickly concedes that a great many technically -need-permission things which you might do are of no actual interest to the gov't. EDIT: The second sentence of the article is - > Like, let’s eat potatoes and see if we lose weight. - which, in the minds of 95% of likely jury members , is not "medical research". Nor, at small scale, of plausible interest to th…
Of no actual interest to the government, unless you are someone that someone in the government wishes to crush. ‘Gosh, Opponent of the Regime, when you wrote your blog entry in 2019 about cutting eggs out of your kids’ diets, that was un-reviewed human research. To jail with you!’