21–30 of 48 posts
A huge portion of these seem to be "I don't like the fact that this heuristic is strongly predictive", not any sort of complaint about the implementation or use of the prediction engine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can blame users for expecting AI to solve everything, but that doesn't mean we give Engineers and Researchers free reign to package, publish, and distribute AI software that falls short of its promise ( and introduces dangerous patterns along the way).
>that doesn't mean we give Engineers and Researchers free reign to package, publish, and distribute AI software that falls short of its promise And who is going to monitor and enforce this? You?
A huge portion of these seem to be "I don't like the fact that this heuristic is strongly predictive", not any sort of complaint about the implementation or use of the prediction engine.
Ehh.. the discrimination part sounds a lot like: "we had an AI look at statistics and it reported the patterns we choose to ignore".
A huge portion of these seem to be "I don't like the fact that this heuristic is strongly predictive", not any sort of complaint about the implementation or use of the prediction engine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can blame users for expecting AI to solve everything, but that doesn't mean we give Engineers and Researchers free reign to package, publish, and distribute AI software that falls short of its promise ( and introduces dangerous patterns along the way).
>that doesn't mean we give Engineers and Researchers free reign to package, publish, and distribute AI software that falls short of its promise And who is going to monitor and enforce this? You?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>that doesn't mean we give Engineers and Researchers free reign to package, publish, and distribute AI software that falls short of its promise And who is going to monitor and enforce this? You?
At a minimum, the engineers and researchers. Deploying an AI sentencing model or AI lie detector should be treated with the same seriousness as deploying a new train or bridge; engineers shouldn't be willing to sign off on such a thing without strong, well-founded reasons to believe it won't hurt anyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can blame users for expecting AI to solve everything, but that doesn't mean we give Engineers and Researchers free reign to package, publish, and distribute AI software that falls short of its promise ( and introduces dangerous patterns along the way).
>that doesn't mean we give Engineers and Researchers free reign to package, publish, and distribute AI software that falls short of its promise And who is going to monitor and enforce this? You?
(Based off of the Stanford Prof’s example during a TED talk of using <$100 to assassinate people with AI, A CO2 canister, a nail, and a drone).
Watch this: https://youtu.be/stHLrBs-_iE (Based off of the Stanford Prof’s example during a TED talk of using <$100 to assassinate people with AI, A CO2 canister, a nail, and a drone).