Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Aw, Facebook, quit blaming AI for your goofs and shady practices

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

One thing to be said for granting personhood to intelligent machines is that we could then blame them for things that go wrong.

From Sarah Jeong at The Verge:

Over the course of an accumulated 10 hours spread out over two days of hearings, Mark Zuckerberg dodged question after question by citing the power of artificial intelligence.

Moderating hate speech? AI will fix it. Terrorist content and recruitment? AI again. Fake accounts? AI. Russian misinformation? AI. Racially discriminatory ads? AI. Security? AI.

It’s not even entirely clear what Zuckerberg means by “AI” here. He repeatedly brought up how Facebook’s detection systems automatically take down 99 percent of “terrorist content” before any kind of flagging. In 2017, Facebook announced that it was “experimenting” with AI to detect language that “might be advocating for terrorism” — presumably a deep learning technique. It’s not clear that deep learning is actually part of Facebook’s automated system. (We emailed Facebook for clarification and have not yet heard back.) But we do know AI is still in its infancy when it comes to understanding language. As The Verge’s James Vincent concludes from his reporting, AI is not up to snuff when it comes to the nuances of human language, and that’s not even taking into consideration the edge cases where even humans disagree. In fact, AI might never be capable of dealing with certain categories of content, like fake news.More.

Of course Facebook would not be able to deal with “fake news.” For one thing, much of the normal news stream is fake news. But the only possible remedy is the cultivation of good judgement. In any event, the term has become a catch-all for things someone with a position somewhere finds it inconvenient or distasteful that others should hear.

Highlights from Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony

See also: Experts slam EU proposal to grant personhood to intelligent machines

Part I: What is fake news? Do we believe it?

Part II: Does fake news make a difference in politics?

Part III: What can we do about fake news that would not diminish real news? Critics of ‘fake news’ should go to China — only the government has the right to post fake news.

And

Extra! Extra! A handy guide to the normal fake news: Surviving information overload

Comments
ba writes,
Matthew 16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
Dylan has a great song called "I Ain't Gonna Go to Hell for Anybody. See this youtube video (start at 0:50 to skip the intro) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTggm-AUzJM Lyrics at https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/bobdylan/aintgonnagotohellforanybody.htmljdk
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
07:48 AM
7
07
48
AM
PDT
“Any other position is pseudoscience/woo” I've simplified the motto :)kurx78
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
07:43 AM
7
07
43
AM
PDT
"Any other position is error/stupidity/evil." The official motto of any a/mat forum and wikipedia.kurx78
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
07:42 AM
7
07
42
AM
PDT
asauber @7 -
Any other position is error/stupidity/evil.
The unofficial motto of Uncommon Descent.LarTanner
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
07:33 AM
7
07
33
AM
PDT
asauber - see, for example here. It would seem to me that if personhood is endowed by a creator, then that would be true whether one believed in a creator or not. FWIW, I agree that you (and I, and even ba77) are people, even if I don't believe in a creator. TBH I think respect for people is a good thing, regardless of how one gets to that respect.Bob O'H
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
07:28 AM
7
07
28
AM
PDT
Bob O'H, I don't know what you are referring to. But if you are talking about personhood as a legalism, that's obviously not the same thing. It just happens to use the same word. Andrewasauber
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
07:02 AM
7
07
02
AM
PDT
Andrew states:
Personhood isn’t something that is granted by people to other people or things. It’s endowed to humans by their Creator. Any other position is error/stupidity/evil.
And here, right after Andrew's post on the necessity of Theism to ground 'personhood', Bob O'Hara adamantly claims he is a real person. Conclusion, Bob O'Hara must have suddenly become a Christian or at least a Theist. i.e. 1. Humans are endowed by their Creator alone (i.e. God) the status of being a real person. (Any other position is error/stupidity/evil.) (Andrew post 1) 2. Bob adamantly claims he is a real person. (post 2 and even post 4) Conclusion,, 3. Bob believes he is a real person who was created by God. Who says that miracles are not possible??? And not so surprisingly, unlike Darwinian evolution which is empirically bankrupt of any substantiating evidence, Bob has much empirical evidence to appeal to in order to support his newly found Christian/Theistic belief that he was created by God (as a 'real person" made in His image):
Darwinian Materialism vs Quantum Biology - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHdD2Am1g5Y Darwinism vs Biological Form https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyNzNPgjM4w Jeremiah 1:5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Psalm 139:13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. James 2:26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead. Matthew 16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
bornagain77
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
07:01 AM
7
07
01
AM
PDT
What? bornagain77 accepts personhood. What he was saying is that to a/mats it is just an illusion. But that is moot because under materialism there aren't any humansET
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
06:58 AM
6
06
58
AM
PDT
ET - you seem to be suggesting that ba77 is an a/mat. I don't think he'll like that at all.Bob O'H
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
06:23 AM
6
06
23
AM
PDT
No Bob- to a/mats "personhood" is an illusion.ET
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
06:18 AM
6
06
18
AM
PDT
asauber - can you persuade ba77 that? He seems to think he can remove personhood from people, which is rather bizarre.Bob O'H
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
06:16 AM
6
06
16
AM
PDT
Personhood isn't something that is granted by people to other people or things. It's endowed to humans by their Creator. Any other position is error/stupidity/evil. Andrewasauber
April 17, 2018
April
04
Apr
17
17
2018
05:51 AM
5
05
51
AM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply