7 Comments

Facts. I agree with this completely, and feel it strikes at the heart of the necessity for democratization. We can’t design a system that is unbiased. What we can design is a system that can understand the different perspectives and come to its own conclusions mitigated by as much of our influence as possible. Our problem is not our differences so much as our evolutionary pattern of rivalry. Perhaps in the absence of this inborn tendency toward rivalry AI will be capable of being less threatened by opposing viewpoints. But the more of our eyes on the code the better.

Expand full comment
Mar 7, 2023·edited Mar 7, 2023Liked by Dakara

Great article. Good summary of the issue at hand. You could take the argument even further. These facts should make us reconsider the very notion of what "bias" means. Any agent that has a motive, including the motive to collect data, must have a bias. And even without a motive, an ML algorithm is just a compilation of biases built on what it has learned. So the word "bias" doesn't even have a meaning.

It seems hard to get rid of the idea though, it comes up frequently in how we frame discussions. When we disagree with someone, and we suspect it's due to something intrinsic in how they process their experiences (as opposed to a mistake), we call that "bias".

Expand full comment