Slashdot Mirror
It's Getting Hard To Know What is Automated and What Isn't (axios.com)
It's increasingly becoming a challenge to know when -- and if -- AI is at play in things we come across in our daily lives. From a report: Applicants usually don't know when a startup has used artificial intelligence to triage their resume. When Big Tech deploys AI to tweak a social feed and maximize scrolling time, users often can't tell, either. The same goes when the government relies on AI to dole out benefits -- citizens have little say in the matter. What's happening: As companies and the government take up AI at a delirious pace, it's increasingly difficult to know what they're automating -- or hold them accountable when they make mistakes. If something goes wrong, those harmed have had no chance to vet their own fate. Why it matters: AI tasked with critical choices can be deployed rapidly, with little supervision -- and it can fall dangerously short. The big picture: Researchers and companies are subject to no fixed rules or even specific professional guidelines regarding AI. Hence, companies have tripped up but suffered little more than a short-lived PR fuss.
AI, without the I.
What is Automated and What Isn't ?
It's not any different than humans...
When I send a resume and some HR person decides to drop it, how isn't any different for me if an AI did it instead?
Either way I don't have anyone to complain to really. The corporation takes liability for it's actions whether human or automated. If I'm going to sue it's the registered agent on record which must be a human. And if they want to send an AI to represent them in court thats ok.
I'll start getting worried when the government starts replacing judges with AI, but I won't mind if they use AI assistance.
I think I don't mind if the career lying and stealing politicians get replaced with AI as long as humans get to vote on the values we use to we train them.
So when you're being disadvantaged by another human in a similar situation, is there a way to hold them accountable ?
I suspect there will be 2 phases of AI growth. The first phase will be giving "bots" the ability do relatively complex but practical tasks, and the 2nd phase will be creating systems that partition and track each intelligence step so that they use divide-and-conquer of both AI-creating staff, and of processes (modules). This will make it easier to understand how a bot acts the way it does, and to tune it.
AI will grow regimented and standardized, along the lines of MVC and similar development partition techniques. There may be pattern-detection sub-engines, rule-based sub-engines, logic-based sub-engines, physics-modelling-based sub-engines, etc.
The second regimented kind may be behind the first type, being say 5 to 10 years behind in ability, but both will improve over time.
Table-ized A.I.
Obviously. It would seem apparent that it was some human that deployed the bad AI to begin with, and if that's not the case they've become more clever than we may have originally thought.
I know folks over 40 who hide their age because they won't get interviews if the company realizes they're over 40.
,etc.
AI and big data have the potential to break that. There's still markers left over from the places you worked, how long, the types of apps you've worked on
You used to see this with black neighborhoods unable to get mortgages because of their zip code. When you put numbers into a database without regard to what comes out you can end up with crap like this.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Just ask the thousands of foreclosure victims from 2009/2010 who were foreclosed and evicted, despite not even being behind on their mortgages.
Not only were the foreclosure processes at the banks automated, but so were the eviction and auction proceedings with the state courts. There were never any human eyes checking things to make sure a foreclosure was legit.
I spent $10K on attorney fees stopping the foreclosure on my house in 2010, which was PAID FOR FREE AND CLEAR, for 4 MONTHS. The bank's automated system detected I had not made a payment in 4 months and initiated foreclosure proceedings to recover ZERO dollars on a PAID OFF loan. The court was all too happy to go along with it.
This. Retards need to stop fucking saying AI.
What's more probable, that the fools that programmed these HR bots made them to regard skill and experience as being highly valuable or that they are simply going to discard everyone that doesn't meet the "desired" qualifications? HR was shitty to start with but this is absolute trash.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Why is it the rich and powerful can come up with more crap to minimize and degrade the value of the middle class and poor? And also do it with impunity! Who the hell makes up this garbage?
We have at least 4000 years of history as a blueprint on how they can get away with it. Human's natural instinct is to take advange of anyone that they can take advantage of. Humans suck.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
>> Researchers and companies are subject to no fixed rules or even specific professional guidelines regarding AI. Hence, companies have tripped up but suffered little more than a short-lived PR fuss.
This looks like it's teeing up to make the case for government regulation, which is really stupid. AI is a leading edge technology, so all the experts who would even understand the parameters involved in implementing "fixed rules" regarding AI are the ones inventing the thing to begin with. All the government would do if charged with making "fixed rules" is stifle innovation to ensure the government's flavor of this technology is stronger than that available to the general public.
If it worked, its not automated. If it didn't work, maybe its automated. Automating is still only works well on fixed function tasks and humans are fallible.
It's not "AI" that needs to be regulated or blamed for these issues.
"AI" is becoming the whipping point, the man, the fall guy for shady actions enacted by corps and employees who are (last I checked) still accountable to regulations and laws enforcing fairness and transparency.
If they're hiding behind AI for bizarre outcomes that are obviously against regulations then that's still - ILLEGAL. Don't blame the AI - take the corp to court for implementing the AI in that way in the same way Wells Fargo was held accountable for their human agents making fake accounts.
For social media and "fake news" this gets a little trickier but the solution is still the same - hold the companies like Facebook and Google accountable for what they post - be it ads or promotional stories that they're paid for.
The 'real danger' is actually the marketing departments that shill this garbage, making people believe it's 'magic' and can actually THINK, i.e. orders of magnitude better than it actually is. Meanwhile nobody not even the programmers really understand why it's spitting out the 'results' it does and therefore how can you trust it at all? I'll be glad when this fad comes to an end (again).
in an interview, but only if you get the interview in the first place. As for them catching it before the interview, if you're just glancing at a resume it's easy enough to miss.
The thing about AI and data automation is that it makes it practical to catch things that time pressed humans miss. These little efficiency boosts add up with mega corporations resulting in tens of millions of dollars in savings. On the downside those savings usually come at the cost of longer hours and harder work for anyone who works for a living.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
AIs are more pathological than humans. Humans have an inherent amount of chaos in decision making that allows for people to have a more difficult time, but not out right blackballed. The biggest issue with AIs is they're only as good as the data their fed, and the more you use AIs, the more biased the data becomes. AIs tend to be self reinforcing, and most humans fall victim to believing the AIs are correct because the create a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.
A simple example might be that a person gets a credit risk score based on an AI. Then because of that potentially poor score, they have to pay higher interest. Maybe this person was low risk, but incorrect labeled as high risk. But now because they're labeled as high risk, they become higher risk because they have more difficulty with acquiring and managing their credit due to limitations. Then other AIs see this and they get trained to be like "this person is high risk and treating them as high risk makes them higher risk, so treat them as even higher risk, which makes them higher risk." Rinse and repeat until it snow-balls to the point that the person can no longer get credit. Yay AIs.
This negative loop might be suboptimal for lending institutions unless they implement a mechanism for forgiveness. It's what humans do - respond in kind, to good with good and bad with bad, but from time to time, forgive, to give a second chance to a better equilibrium.
The fundamental problem with AI in a HR context is that there are well-established laws protecting employees from certain forms of discrimination. No publicly-traded corporation's management would DARE to officially suggest, let alone demand, that its HR staff systematically discriminate against applicants based upon their sex, religion, national origin, etc. in ways that violate against laws, because it would be an open invitation to fines and lawsuits when the policy was inevitably disclosed by a disgruntled former employee.
The problem is, AI-logic (especially deep learning and pattern recognition) tends to be EXTREMELY opaque and impossible for humans to make sense of. That's WHY someone used deep learning in the first place... it's great at spotting patterns that look like random noise to humans. The catch is, if you can't explain the logic, you ALSO can't guarantee that it's not indirectly basing its logic on criteria that are ILLEGAL to consider in the first place.
There is no AI at this time (at least none that deserved the name), so "never" is the correct answer. Now, if you are talking about dumb, non-intelligent automation and statistical classification, that is something else...
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.