On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 2:48 PM Robert Levy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Are the mods just going to ignore James Bowery? > Since algorithmically correcting "bias" is now seen as a central responsibility of network effect content monopolies like Google, Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, etc. rigorously measuring a dataset's "bias" is even more urgent than is measuring "intelligence" or even "friendliness". Exactly _how_ urgent? Consider this: These content monopolies are intent on avoiding "a repeat of the 2016 election", whatever that means. One thing is for certain: Claims that they are attempting to provide an unbiased view of the world via their machine learning algorithms in the run up to the 2020 election is viewed with a great deal of suspicion by people wielding on the order of 400 guns in the US alone. That's _exactly_ how urgent. Since we're stuck with some form of "prior" (speed prior, space prior, etc.), and any prior will introduce bias in some sense, it seems the more minimal that prior, the less bias it introduces to a minimum description length of all available data. So why aren't all these content giants striving to create the largest database of diverse, longitudinal social measures that their hardware and human resources can support, and losslessly compressing it, so as to have an unbiased platform upon which to measure "bias" in new data being added to their content stores? ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T9ab9fba591214e64-M0b4a22449a4845769a7a524a Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
