{"id":5442,"date":"2019-08-20T15:09:12","date_gmt":"2019-08-20T19:09:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/afutureworththinkingabout.com\/?p=5442"},"modified":"2019-10-16T00:52:33","modified_gmt":"2019-10-16T04:52:33","slug":"audio-transcripts-and-slides-from-any-sufficiently-advanced-neglect-is-indistinguishable-from-malice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/afutureworththinkingabout.com\/?p=5442","title":{"rendered":"Audio, Transcripts, and Slides from “Any Sufficiently Advanced Neglect is Indistinguishable from Malice”"},"content":{"rendered":"
Below are the slides, audio, and transcripts for my talk ‘”Any Sufficiently Advanced Neglect is Indistinguishable from Malice”: Assumptions and Bias in Algorithmic Systems,’ given at the 21st Conference of the Society for Philosophy and Technology<\/a>, back in May 2019.<\/div>\n

(Cite as: Williams, Damien P. ‘”Any Sufficiently Advanced Neglect is Indistinguishable from Malice”: Assumptions and Bias in Algorithmic Systems;’ talk given at the 21st Conference of the Society for Philosophy and Technology; May 2019)<\/p>\n

Now, I’ve got a chapter coming out about this, soon, which I can provide as a preprint draft if you ask, and can be cited as “Constructing Situated and Social Knowledge: Ethical, Sociological, and Phenomenological Factors in Technological Design,” appearing in Philosophy And Engineering: Reimagining Technology And Social Progress<\/i>. Guru Madhavan, Zachary Pirtle, and David Tomblin, eds. Forthcoming from Springer, 2019. But I wanted to get the words I said in this talk up onto some platforms where people can read them, as soon as possible, for a\u00a0 couple of reasons.<\/p>\n

First, the Current Occupants of the Oval Office have very recently taken the policy position that algorithms can’t be racist<\/a>, something which they’ve done in direct response to<\/i><\/b> things like Google\u2019s Hate Speech-Detecting AI being biased against black people<\/a>, and Amazon claiming that its facial recognition can identify fear<\/a>, without ever accounting for, i dunno, cultural and individual differences in fear expression?<\/p>\n

[Free vector image of a white, female-presenting person, from head to torso, with biometric facial recognition patterns on her face; incidentally, go try finding images\u2014even illustrations\u2014of a non-white person in a facial recognition context.]<\/p><\/div>
\nAll these things taken together are what made me finally go ahead and get the transcript of that talk done, and posted, because these are events and policy decisions about which I a) have been speaking and writing for years, and b) have specific inputs and recommendations about, and which are, c) frankly wrongheaded, and outright hateful.<\/p>\n

And I want to spend time on it because I think what doesn’t get through in many of our discussions is that it’s not just about how Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, or Algorithmic instances<\/i><\/b> get trained, but the processes<\/i><\/b> for how and the cultural environments in which HUMANS<\/i><\/b> are increasingly taught\/shown\/environmentally encouraged\/socialized to think is the “right way” to build and train said systems.<\/p>\n

That includes classes and instruction, it includes the institutional culture of the companies, it includes the policy landscape in which decisions about funding and get made, because that drives how people have to talk and write and think<\/i><\/b> about the work they’re doing, and that constrains what they will even attempt<\/i><\/b> to do or even understand.<\/p>\n

All of this is cumulative, accreting into institutional epistemologies of algorithm creation. It is a structural and institutional<\/i><\/b> problem.<\/p>\n

So here are the Slides<\/strong>:<\/p>\n