the justification for not needing one for fingerprints is the same for face scans.
Correct. In Maryland v King the Supreme Court put DNA scans in the same category. No warrant or probable cause is needed.
From the ruling: "taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee's DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment."
Accusation without corroborating evidence can still be very damaging.
If you are a false positive living in NJ, and the victim is in Los Angeles, you will just be crossed off the list, and you will never know you were flagged. It will have no effect whatsoever on your life.
Sure no problem. Just change the liscene terms of Wikipedia to no commercial use unless....
They can not retroactively change the license. I contributed many articles and edits to Wikipedia, and I absolutely would NOT agree to "no commercial use". I contributed so that anyone can use it for any purpose, and Wikipedia has no right to change that just because they feel greedy.
Conservative victimologists will notice. They will use the argument that "we are being silenced" to generate outrage and help get out the vote on November 6th.
Democrats fail to understand right-wing anger. They think the Brett Kavanaugh hearings helped them, but polls are showing the opposite: it is the right that is riled up and angry, because... umm... their guy won again.
democrats aren't generally dumb enough to fall for FB spambot trolls, which is why you don't really see any.
Actually, the reason Democrats don't troll is that, thanks to Poe's Law, they don't need to. Actual authentic right-wing posts already go far beyond any trolling or parody that the Democrats could come up with.
censorship is censorship, regardless of whether or not the people targeted are citizens or not. welcome to marxist usa.
Congress has banned paid political speech by foreigners. The authority for this comes from the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, unless they are filthy foreigners.
people voluntarily made their DNA public to the whole world, you are going to tell them they can't do that?
I submitted my DNA to 23andMe. I clicked on fully public. Maybe I will link up with a 2nd cousin I didn't know. Maybe I will help catch a killer. Maybe my insurance company will peek at my info, see I am very healthy, and give me a loyalty discount. What have i got to lose?
If you're trawling trough a database of everyone's genes it means per definition that they are ALL suspects.
Saying "everyone" is a suspect is the same as saying no one is a suspect. It is meaningless.
DNA evidence has more often been used to exonerate the innocent than to convict the guilty. Just ask the Central Park Five, although Donald Trump still insists they are guilty.
Where everyone is a suspect and you're guilty unless proven innocent.
It doesn't work that way. Even a DNA match alone is not enough to convict. There has to be corroborating evidence.
But if the DNA match flags 20 people, and 19 of them live in other states, and the other one is the murder victim's ex-boyfriend with a domestic violence restraining order on him, then he's goin' down.
And in order to get the crop yields necessary to support all that, we'd better increase the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers.
Plant based protein requires less land. water, and chemicals than animal protein.
The biggest consumers of irrigated water in America is grass and alfalfa.
The best sources of plant protein are legumes (beans, peas, lentils, and peanuts), which have symbiotic nitrifying bacteria in their roots. They require less fertilizer than animal feed crops such as maize.
Yeah, good luck to them on the reducing meat consumption by 90%...
The problem is not "meat" but beef. Chicken, farmed fish, and even pork have far less environmental impact. Cattle use a lot of land, eat a lot, fart a lot, and reproduce slowly.
And you know,if we quite raising so much food to export, it might help turn the tide of world overpopulations
Most American food exports go to countries that are already at or near ZPG. We already know how to reduce population growth: 1. Reduce child mortality, so people don't feel a need to have so many kids. 2. Increase female literacy so women have other options than to stay home and pop out babies. 3. Easy access to contraceptives. Many women would choose fewer kids if they had a choice.
If noone is earning money, who is going to buy your product?
Is that why countries that have avoided automation, like Ethiopia, Somalia, and Afghanistan, are doing so much better than countries like America, and Western Europe, that have seen their economies destroyed by the "productivity catastrophe"?
Sure, but they also have a huge amount of make-work because they have a near-puritanical work ethic.
I worked in Tokyo for a few years, and it was common to see people still at their desk at 8 or 9pm, yet playing video games (with the audio off) since they had no work to do, but didn't want to leave the office before the boss.
Then when they finally leave, they have a 2 hour subway ride back home.
This is way they don't have time to start a family.
The Mozilla Foundation raises money from donors who believe they are funding free software development. Then Mozilla spends that money instead on this ideological crusade, and other nonsense such as sponsoring a surfing contest.
Is this money diversion and mission creep ethical?
My opinion: 1. Mozilla has way more money than they need for their core mission. 2. Mozilla should not be lecturing anyone on ethics.
Many people write their CVs in the 3rd person. So gender is easy to identify.
It is also easy to strip out he/she/him/her before feeding the data into a NN.
My experience is that men tend to puff up their resumes more than women do. They inflate their accomplishments and responsibilities. Women tend to be more modest.
That's almost certainly creating a bias in an attempt to fix one.
Of course. But do you want an unbiased process, or unbiased outcomes? Amazon tried to create the former, and failed at the latter. It is easy to switch, but likely impossible to have both.
If the AI was coming to conclusions based on non-gender things, and it still selected predominately men to hire, then there must be some qualification or skill that men predominately have that women do not.
Good luck going to court and arguing that you didn't hire women because they are bad employees.
This is not the kind of thing you can fix just by including "man" or "woman" in the qualification list and trying to "unbias" the output by manual changes.
Yes it is. This is the fix, and likely the only fix.
How about simply selling the bought/stolen iphones instead?
1. The phone would have to be sold as "used", without a box. If they exchange it at the Apple store, they will get a brand new phone, still in the box, with all the documentation and accessories. It will sell for a much higher price.
2. The phone contains an IMEI that can identify it as stolen, so it may be locked out of some cellular networks. So why wasn't Apple checking the IMEI before authorizing an exchange? No idea. But maybe they were stolen and exchanged so quickly that it wasn't reported yet. Thieves often have remarkably efficient logistics.
I wonder where all the parts they are ripping out of the insides end up?
A lot of them end up in fake iPhones, using either knock-off cases, or cases stolen from the Apple factory in Shenzhen.
In any area frequented by gullible foreigners, you can find people selling iPhones on street corners. They often work just well enough to turn on and run a demo to "show that they work".
The sellers are rotated to different street corners every few hours, so when you go back later to demand your money back, it is not the same person, and they will claim (correctly) that they have never seen you before.
Not all Chinese fakes are like this. For instance, the fake Rolex watches work very well. I bought my wife a fake LV handbag that seems stitch by stitch identical to the real thing. She has no idea that it isn't real.
But the law is pretty clear that you can't use any protected category in your resume sorting even if it's statistically predictive,
No, the law is NOT clear on this.
Many companies have been fined by the EEOC, not because their hiring process was shown to be biased, but because the outcome of the hiring process did not match the race and gender profile of the candidate pool. These were, of course, big companies with workforces big enough to statistically analyze. Smaller companies can get away with almost anything short of overt discrimination.
So while the law does not explicitly require quotas, and even seems to prohibit them, in practice the law is often enforced in a way that pretty much requires "quotas" (although you better not call them that).
No it doesn't. This is trivial to fix. You just slap a softmax layer onto the output of your NN to correct the bias.
So if your candidate pool is 70% men and 30% women, and you want your output to reflect that, then instead of just accepting the gender-agnostic "best", your softmax layer shapes the output so that you pick the top 70% of men and the top 30% of women... or any other statistical distribution that you want.
So instead of "scrapping" their recruiting tool, Amazon could have easily fixed it with 5 minutes of high school math (statistics and linear algebra are both taught in high schools).
Slashdot Mirror
the justification for not needing one for fingerprints is the same for face scans.
Correct. In Maryland v King the Supreme Court put DNA scans in the same category. No warrant or probable cause is needed.
From the ruling: "taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee's DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment."
Accusation without corroborating evidence can still be very damaging.
If you are a false positive living in NJ, and the victim is in Los Angeles, you will just be crossed off the list, and you will never know you were flagged. It will have no effect whatsoever on your life.
Are we running out of things to criticize Amazon for now that they've been shamed into paying living wages?
Well, if we want to close the loop, we could criticize them for contributing to wage inflation.
Sure no problem. Just change the liscene terms of Wikipedia to no commercial use unless ....
They can not retroactively change the license. I contributed many articles and edits to Wikipedia, and I absolutely would NOT agree to "no commercial use". I contributed so that anyone can use it for any purpose, and Wikipedia has no right to change that just because they feel greedy.
No one will even notice a difference.
Conservative victimologists will notice. They will use the argument that "we are being silenced" to generate outrage and help get out the vote on November 6th.
Democrats fail to understand right-wing anger. They think the Brett Kavanaugh hearings helped them, but polls are showing the opposite: it is the right that is riled up and angry, because ... umm ... their guy won again.
democrats aren't generally dumb enough to fall for FB spambot trolls, which is why you don't really see any.
Actually, the reason Democrats don't troll is that, thanks to Poe's Law, they don't need to. Actual authentic right-wing posts already go far beyond any trolling or parody that the Democrats could come up with.
censorship is censorship, regardless of whether or not the people targeted are citizens or not. welcome to marxist usa.
Congress has banned paid political speech by foreigners. The authority for this comes from the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, unless they are filthy foreigners.
people voluntarily made their DNA public to the whole world, you are going to tell them they can't do that?
I submitted my DNA to 23andMe. I clicked on fully public. Maybe I will link up with a 2nd cousin I didn't know. Maybe I will help catch a killer. Maybe my insurance company will peek at my info, see I am very healthy, and give me a loyalty discount. What have i got to lose?
If you're trawling trough a database of everyone's genes it means per definition that they are ALL suspects.
Saying "everyone" is a suspect is the same as saying no one is a suspect. It is meaningless.
DNA evidence has more often been used to exonerate the innocent than to convict the guilty. Just ask the Central Park Five, although Donald Trump still insists they are guilty.
Where everyone is a suspect and you're guilty unless proven innocent.
It doesn't work that way. Even a DNA match alone is not enough to convict. There has to be corroborating evidence.
But if the DNA match flags 20 people, and 19 of them live in other states, and the other one is the murder victim's ex-boyfriend with a domestic violence restraining order on him, then he's goin' down.
You forgot the easiest, which also can not only reduce growth, but also reduce population itself:
4. War.
Unstable war-torn countries tend to have the HIGHEST birthrates, and the fastest population growth rates.
The country with the highest birthrate in Asia is Afghanistan.
The highest birthrates in Africa are in Mali, Niger, and Angola.
Birthrate by country
People in war-zones move toward an r-selection reproductive strategy.
And in order to get the crop yields necessary to support all that, we'd better increase the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers.
Plant based protein requires less land. water, and chemicals than animal protein.
The biggest consumers of irrigated water in America is grass and alfalfa.
The best sources of plant protein are legumes (beans, peas, lentils, and peanuts), which have symbiotic nitrifying bacteria in their roots. They require less fertilizer than animal feed crops such as maize.
Yeah, good luck to them on the reducing meat consumption by 90%...
The problem is not "meat" but beef. Chicken, farmed fish, and even pork have far less environmental impact. Cattle use a lot of land, eat a lot, fart a lot, and reproduce slowly.
And you know,if we quite raising so much food to export, it might help turn the tide of world overpopulations
Most American food exports go to countries that are already at or near ZPG. We already know how to reduce population growth:
1. Reduce child mortality, so people don't feel a need to have so many kids.
2. Increase female literacy so women have other options than to stay home and pop out babies.
3. Easy access to contraceptives. Many women would choose fewer kids if they had a choice.
Look, Oracle is out to make money, no more, no less.
They are also seeking a Sith apprentice to work with Lord Ellison.
If YOUR values don't match up with society's, then it's nothing more than someone forcing their values on you
Correct. That is exactly what it is.
My statement above stands correct and true.
Wrong. Ethics and morals are not the same. Morals means following your heart. Ethics means following the rules.
Every employee replaced is one less customer for your products.
Every dollar not spent on that employee is one more dollar spent on something else, generating jobs elsewhere in the economy.
Lump of Labor Fallacy
If noone is earning money, who is going to buy your product?
Is that why countries that have avoided automation, like Ethiopia, Somalia, and Afghanistan, are doing so much better than countries like America, and Western Europe, that have seen their economies destroyed by the "productivity catastrophe"?
Sure, but they also have a huge amount of make-work because they have a near-puritanical work ethic.
I worked in Tokyo for a few years, and it was common to see people still at their desk at 8 or 9pm, yet playing video games (with the audio off) since they had no work to do, but didn't want to leave the office before the boss.
Then when they finally leave, they have a 2 hour subway ride back home.
This is way they don't have time to start a family.
The Mozilla Foundation raises money from donors who believe they are funding free software development. Then Mozilla spends that money instead on this ideological crusade, and other nonsense such as sponsoring a surfing contest.
Is this money diversion and mission creep ethical?
My opinion:
1. Mozilla has way more money than they need for their core mission.
2. Mozilla should not be lecturing anyone on ethics.
Ethics are morals.
Ethics are values set by a society or organization.
Morals are your own internal values.
You can be simultaneously ethical and immoral, or moral but unethical.
I have found that it is best to be flexible in both ethics and morality. Life is more fun that way.
Many people write their CVs in the 3rd person. So gender is easy to identify.
It is also easy to strip out he/she/him/her before feeding the data into a NN.
My experience is that men tend to puff up their resumes more than women do. They inflate their accomplishments and responsibilities. Women tend to be more modest.
That's almost certainly creating a bias in an attempt to fix one.
Of course. But do you want an unbiased process, or unbiased outcomes? Amazon tried to create the former, and failed at the latter. It is easy to switch, but likely impossible to have both.
If the AI was coming to conclusions based on non-gender things, and it still selected predominately men to hire, then there must be some qualification or skill that men predominately have that women do not.
Good luck going to court and arguing that you didn't hire women because they are bad employees.
This is not the kind of thing you can fix just by including "man" or "woman" in the qualification list and trying to "unbias" the output by manual changes.
Yes it is. This is the fix, and likely the only fix.
How about simply selling the bought/stolen iphones instead?
1. The phone would have to be sold as "used", without a box. If they exchange it at the Apple store, they will get a brand new phone, still in the box, with all the documentation and accessories. It will sell for a much higher price.
2. The phone contains an IMEI that can identify it as stolen, so it may be locked out of some cellular networks. So why wasn't Apple checking the IMEI before authorizing an exchange? No idea. But maybe they were stolen and exchanged so quickly that it wasn't reported yet. Thieves often have remarkably efficient logistics.
I wonder where all the parts they are ripping out of the insides end up?
A lot of them end up in fake iPhones, using either knock-off cases, or cases stolen from the Apple factory in Shenzhen.
In any area frequented by gullible foreigners, you can find people selling iPhones on street corners. They often work just well enough to turn on and run a demo to "show that they work".
The sellers are rotated to different street corners every few hours, so when you go back later to demand your money back, it is not the same person, and they will claim (correctly) that they have never seen you before.
Not all Chinese fakes are like this. For instance, the fake Rolex watches work very well. I bought my wife a fake LV handbag that seems stitch by stitch identical to the real thing. She has no idea that it isn't real.
But the law is pretty clear that you can't use any protected category in your resume sorting even if it's statistically predictive,
No, the law is NOT clear on this.
Many companies have been fined by the EEOC, not because their hiring process was shown to be biased, but because the outcome of the hiring process did not match the race and gender profile of the candidate pool. These were, of course, big companies with workforces big enough to statistically analyze. Smaller companies can get away with almost anything short of overt discrimination.
So while the law does not explicitly require quotas, and even seems to prohibit them, in practice the law is often enforced in a way that pretty much requires "quotas" (although you better not call them that).
what data you feed in defines what model you get.
No it doesn't. This is trivial to fix. You just slap a softmax layer onto the output of your NN to correct the bias.
So if your candidate pool is 70% men and 30% women, and you want your output to reflect that, then instead of just accepting the gender-agnostic "best", your softmax layer shapes the output so that you pick the top 70% of men and the top 30% of women ... or any other statistical distribution that you want.
So instead of "scrapping" their recruiting tool, Amazon could have easily fixed it with 5 minutes of high school math (statistics and linear algebra are both taught in high schools).