Meanwhile in the UK we’re wasting time setting the country on fire.
There’s a lot to think about in Mr Levin’s article. Most interestingly that there was no such thing as “neutral” AI.
The idea that you can do AI or technical ethics without a point of view is silly … The bias is deep inside the code.
It’s obvious but until it’s called out, you’re not looking for it. And if you’re not looking for it, things will continue unchecked. It occurs to me that bias is our attempt to replicate the world in our image. It’s a survival mechanism, a hangover from our primal past. It’s interesting that in the discourse around these issues, people are being asked to evolve. But even those excluded because of bias, have their own bias. Surely the point is not to exclude all bias. That’s like trying to exclude oxygen from water. If you exclude oxygen, it’s not water. So logically we must, to be unbiased, include all of the biases.
The plot thickens like dehydrated honey on the chin of beetle.
We’re going to need a lot more of this as global warming overwhelms our thermometers. Perhaps the guys at MIT could integrate it into the vast floating domes we’re goin to need, the habitats we’ll be living in when sea levels rise, and submerge cities like London.
Not to self: Story idea: In a post-apocalyptic world, drowned by rising sea level, a vast floating dome is habitat to city of people only just surviving. With the dome crumbling, their home falling apart, how will the inhabitant of “Atmosphere” survive?
This is a really interesting piece of science. For some reason it makes me think of TRON.