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
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more