Skip to main content

More than a Glitch - Meredith Broussard ***

In some ways this is a less effective version of Cathy O'Neil's Weapons of Math Destruction with an overlay of identity politics. 

Meredith Broussard usefully identifies the ways in which AI systems incorporate bias - sometimes directly in the systems, at other times in the unjustified ways that they are used. We see powerful examples, for example, of the hugely problematic crime prediction systems where it's entirely clear that these AI systems simply should not be used. A useful pointer is what a 'white collar' crime prediction system would do (and why it doesn't really exist). We get similar examples from education, ability issues, gender rights and medical applications.

What I'd hoped would make the difference from earlier books were solutions, when Broussard brings in the concept of 'public interest technology' and outlines a 'potential reboot'. Again, there is some interesting material, though it can seem to be in conflict with other parts of the book. Earlier Broussard argues powerfully that it's not enough to fix bias in AI systems, because the systems have no understanding of the circumstances - this will always need human input. But under public interest technology, we are told 'algorithmic auditing shows great promise for decreasing bias and fixing or preventing algorithmic harms'. Algorithmic auditing is doing exactly what was said earlier wasn't really possible - 'examining an algorithm for bias or unfairness, then evaluating and revising it to make it better.' In the end, this is the kind of problem where the devil is in the detail - and there is little evidence here of solutions that are aware of this, just as proved the case with the way that GDPR in the EU adds layers of bureaucracy without doing the job.

The book sometimes make statements as fact that don't seem backed up. In part this is because it is so intensely US-focused. There's no attempt to look at different cultural settings. So, for example, early on Broussard makes the statement 'People also consistently overestimate how much of the world is made up of people like themselves.' Yet 'the world' is not the US. Data from the UK, for instance, shows consistently that white people significantly underestimate how much of the UK population is white.

The content sometimes sets things against each other that either don't ring true or don't really go together. For example, talking about a shoplifting incident involving the theft of watches worth $3,800, Broussard states 'It's not a good idea to prosecute shoplifting that is this low in dollar value.' Really? To a small business, losses like that can be catastrophic. We are then told that retailers are partly to blame for shoplifting by introducing self-checkouts to reduce costs. Really? But shops that sell $3,800 worth of watches rarely use self-checkouts - and for many customers, self-checkouts are very useful. Why should they be disadvantaged because it makes it a bit easier for criminals?

Without doubt an interesting book, but it doesn't add much that is useful to the discussion that hasn't already been said.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...

The Infinite Alphabet - Cesar Hidalgo ****

Although taking a very new approach, this book by a physicist working in economics made me nostalgic for the business books of the 1980s. More on why in a moment, but Cesar Hidalgo sets out to explain how it is knowledge - how it is developed, how it is managed and forgotten - that makes the difference between success and failure. When I worked for a corporate in the 1980s I was very taken with Tom Peters' business books such of In Search of Excellence (with Robert Waterman), which described what made it possible for some companies to thrive and become huge while others failed. (It's interesting to look back to see a balance amongst the companies Peters thought were excellent, with successes such as Walmart and Intel, and failures such as Wang and Kodak.) In a similar way, Hidalgo uses case studies of successes and failures for both businesses and countries in making effective use of knowledge to drive economic success. When I read a Tom Peters book I was inspired and fired up...

The War on Science - Lawrence Krauss (Ed.) ****

At first glance this might appear to be yet another book on how to deal with climate change deniers and the like, such as How to Talk to a Science Denier.   It is, however, a much more significant book because it addresses the way that universities, government and pressure groups have attempted to undermine the scientific process. Conceptually I would give it five stars, but it's quite heavy going because it's a collection of around 18 essays by different academics, with many going over the same ground, so there is a lot of repetition. Even so, it's an important book. There are a few well-known names here - editor Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker - but also a range of scientists (with a few philosophers) explaining how science is being damaged in academia by unscientific ideas. Many of the issues apply to other disciplines as well, but this is specifically about the impact on science, and particularly important there because of the damage it has been doing...