Slashdot Mirror
A New Bill Would Force Companies To Check Their Algorithms For Bias (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: U.S. lawmakers have introduced a bill that would require large companies to audit machine learning-powered systems -- like facial recognition or ad targeting algorithms -- for bias. The Algorithmic Accountability Act is sponsored by Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Ron Wyden (D-OR), with a House equivalent sponsored by Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY). If passed, it would ask the Federal Trade Commission to create rules for evaluating "highly sensitive" automated systems. Companies would have to assess whether the algorithms powering these tools are biased or discriminatory, as well as whether they pose a privacy or security risk to consumers.
The Algorithmic Accountability Act is aimed at major companies with access to large amounts of information. It would apply to companies that make over $50 million per year, hold information on at least 1 million people or devices, or primarily act as data brokers that buy and sell consumer data. These companies would have to evaluate a broad range of algorithms -- including anything that affects consumers' legal rights, attempts to predict and analyze their behavior, involves large amounts of sensitive data, or "systematically monitors a large, publicly accessible physical place." That would theoretically cover a huge swath of the tech economy, and if a report turns up major risks of discrimination, privacy problems, or other issues, the company is supposed to address them within a timely manner.
The Algorithmic Accountability Act is aimed at major companies with access to large amounts of information. It would apply to companies that make over $50 million per year, hold information on at least 1 million people or devices, or primarily act as data brokers that buy and sell consumer data. These companies would have to evaluate a broad range of algorithms -- including anything that affects consumers' legal rights, attempts to predict and analyze their behavior, involves large amounts of sensitive data, or "systematically monitors a large, publicly accessible physical place." That would theoretically cover a huge swath of the tech economy, and if a report turns up major risks of discrimination, privacy problems, or other issues, the company is supposed to address them within a timely manner.
What does conservative or liberal even mean these days?
Based on what I've seen and heard, if the argument about an issue is evidence based - has evidence to back it - it's "liberal" or "leftist".
For example, global warming. The evidence is conclusive that it is happening and that humans are accelerating it and even causing it. Somehow, that's "liberal".
Now, the "conservatives" are denying it because from what I can gather is that they are worried about being taxed over it - somehow. Maybe they're worried about carbon taxes or something - I don't know. Getting specifics is impossible from them.
However, as the trend continues, there will be huge environmental damage that will end up being paid for by the taxpayer. Storm damage on the coast? Well, it'll be declared a Federal disaster area and we'll all be paying for it. And as global warming gets worse, so will the damage.
Now mitigation will result in a net win. Cleaning up the environment, investing in new green energy and getting off of fossil fuels will benefit the average American. As it is though, the rest of the World is ahead of us - even China. We, the USA, are losing. We are behind because of this pathological attachment to coal, oil and gas.
The future comes whether we like it or not. Progress happens and trying to keep the status quo - be conservative - is always a losing position. Accept change or get left behind - the fly-over states are a perfect example. They refused to get with the times and as a result, they are being left in the economic dust by the "liberal" parts of the country.