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

Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

fatml.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#21

Post by hasenj »

AstralStorm wrote: post #13
reader5000 wrote: post #4

In the sjw-religion, why is "homemaker" considered inferior to "computer programmer"? One of the oldest and most important human occupations versus hunched over at a desk slaving for a salary until being outsourced to a bot in 5 years? I've never understood the default sjw/"feminism" assumptions that anything feminine is "bad".

Because it pays less (therefore enforcing financial gender inequality for which there is no good reason) and has been stereotyped for longer. It is sort of backwards thinking. The often unspoken assumption is that stereotypes are strictly bad and evil. Without stereotypes, all the social conduct just breaks down and explodes - people suddenly become unpredictable. However, stereotypes (including SJW stereotype) can c…

How does it pay less? You get to have a place​ to live, eat, sleep, all for free, without having to stay away from your children for an extended part of the day.

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#22

Post by throwanem »

praxulus wrote: post #9
backpropaganda wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example of a situation where an ML application would be reinforcing a problematic bias but still have good performance metrics? My point is that a wrongly-applied ML application would suffer in just plain accuracy. For instance, a Automatic Carrier Counsellor might give "homemaker" as a suggested career choice to women, but then before we start calling it biased, it would already be wrong . If the sam…

Recidivism prediction systems will usually tell you that black people are more likely to get arrested/convicted again. They do so accurately, but also result in longer sentences for black people. https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.07524

That sounds like exactly the kind of thing you'd expect to happen when you treat people as feature clusters instead of, you know, people.

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#23

Post by ZenPsycho »

xupybd wrote: post #10
praxulus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recidivism prediction systems will usually tell you that black people are more likely to get arrested/convicted again. They do so accurately, but also result in longer sentences for black people. https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.07524

Yeah but doesn't that have more to do with the way the predictions are used? It seems to me to be a stupid thing to do. This person seems more likely to get convicted again, lock 'em up longer. Instead of asking why is this person more likely to get convicted again? Can we prevent this in a redemptive non punitive way? It's really useful to have that prediction/data but how you use it is more important

the problem is a layperson doesn't necessarily know what a prediction necessarily means without a deep understanding of how the system is making its predictions, let alone how to apply it.

worse is that since the prediction is coming from computer that lends the prediction an air of authority another article called "bias laundering". the general belief is that computers are objective and cannot have bias, which in a sense is true, but people don't tend to think a step further about the problems and biases in the people who programmed the computer.

so that is definitely a thing usually missing from these discussions is that the people using these systems generally don't know how they work, and believe they predict or imply things that they don't

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#24

Post by industriousthou »

praxulus wrote: post #9
backpropaganda wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example of a situation where an ML application would be reinforcing a problematic bias but still have good performance metrics? My point is that a wrongly-applied ML application would suffer in just plain accuracy. For instance, a Automatic Carrier Counsellor might give "homemaker" as a suggested career choice to women, but then before we start calling it biased, it would already be wrong . If the sam…

Recidivism prediction systems will usually tell you that black people are more likely to get arrested/convicted again. They do so accurately, but also result in longer sentences for black people. https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.07524

I mean, that same algorithm could be used to determine that blacks or other at-risk groups should receive extra attention or support. An accurate picture of reality can be used poorly or well.

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#25

Post by kgwgk »

kingbirdy wrote: post #16
reader5000 wrote: post #4

In the sjw-religion, why is "homemaker" considered inferior to "computer programmer"? One of the oldest and most important human occupations versus hunched over at a desk slaving for a salary until being outsourced to a bot in 5 years? I've never understood the default sjw/"feminism" assumptions that anything feminine is "bad".

No one ever became a billionaire by homemaking

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_divor...

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#26

Post by AstralStorm »

Jill_the_Pill wrote: post #20
kingbirdy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one ever became a billionaire by homemaking

Martha Stewart got halfway there.

Unfortunately she is not the best example as a lot of her money was made in the widely publicized inside trading case.

There are others though for sure.

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#27

Post by angmarsbane »

AstralStorm wrote: post #15
angmarsbane wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't so much bad or negative as it is risky. A homemaker, male or female, becomes financially reliant on his/her partner. A partner who can die, become too disabled/ill to work, or who can leave after the homemaker has missed his/her key career/skill building years. Women are more likely to be pushed or encouraged to take this important supportive role to benefit others while putting themselves at risk.

It goes both ways, the partner can become reliant on this kind of support. And only sometimes partly you can cover the difference with money and/or power - typically much more expensive than cooperation. In fact I'd say the housekeeping skills are always more marketable, more basic and easier to master - you can live off them, but not without. This gives rise to competition which drives both social perception of valu…

It is a lot easier to hire someone to take care of housekeeping duties or to do them yourself than it is to make up for 10+ years of little to zero non-homemaking skill development.

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#28

Post by jakelazaroff »

hasenj wrote: post #21
AstralStorm wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it pays less (therefore enforcing financial gender inequality for which there is no good reason) and has been stereotyped for longer. It is sort of backwards thinking. The often unspoken assumption is that stereotypes are strictly bad and evil. Without stereotypes, all the social conduct just breaks down and explodes - people suddenly become unpredictable. However, stereotypes (including SJW stereotype) can c…

How does it pay less? You get to have a place​ to live, eat, sleep, all for free, without having to stay away from your children for an extended part of the day.

To whom is the paycheck made out? In a relationship with a large pay disparity, there is a financial dependence and vast power difference between the involved parties.

If your partner started to abuse you, would you rather be the homemaker or the person whose name is on the paychecks?

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#29

Post by anigbrowl »

backpropaganda wrote: post #7
xupybd wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have a really good point here. The problem is that we have this current bias in society and people wish to change it. I think there is a fear, that if we reflect this bias, in the way we talk, we re-enforce the bias. It seems an effective tool, if you want to change thinking then police the way words can be used around the topic. It is however worrying that machines could start playing a role in this. It…

My point isn't that accuracy and bias are orthogonal, but that bias is contained in the accuracy metric.

That's fine if you are measuring the bias component too. If you're not, you risk perpetuating it. It's natural if I read a sentence about hands to conclude that the test refers to people and not fish, but if I read about 'the hands of a surgeon' and assume that those hands are male based on the current demographics of the surgical profession, I'm making an unwarranted assumption on insufficient information. It's wise to grant utility to uncertainty by maintaining a 'Don't know' option rather than being in a rush to make a determination before it is necessary, not least because of the computational cost of unwinding incorrect assumptions.

Re: Machine Bias: Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker?

#30

Post by industriousthou »

backpropaganda wrote: post #7
xupybd wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have a really good point here. The problem is that we have this current bias in society and people wish to change it. I think there is a fear, that if we reflect this bias, in the way we talk, we re-enforce the bias. It seems an effective tool, if you want to change thinking then police the way words can be used around the topic. It is however worrying that machines could start playing a role in this. It…

My point isn't that accuracy and bias are orthogonal, but that bias is contained in the accuracy metric.

Isn't it preferable to accurately measure and account for Bias? The same metrics can be used to combat bias that reinforce it. Without accurate metrics, how do you form your argument against bias? Feelings?
Post reply on HN