this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
292 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

59148 readers
2312 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

I mostly agree with this distinction.

However, if you are at the receiving end of a mistake made my either a classic algorithm or an machine learning algorithm, then you probably won't care whether it was the computer or the programmer making the mistake. In the end the result is the same.

"Computers make mistakes" is just a way of saying that you shouldn't blindly trust whatever output the computer spits out.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

if you are at the receiving end of a mistake made my either a classic algorithm or an machine learning algorithm, then you probably won't care whether it was the computer or the programmer making the mistake

I'm absolutely expecting corporations to get away with the argument that "they cannot be blamed for the outcome of a system that they neither control nor understand, and that is shown to work in X% of cases". Or at least to spend billions trying to.

And in case you think traceability doesn't matter anyway, think again.

IMHO it's crucial we defend the "computers don't make mistakes" fact for two reasons:

  1. Computers are defined as working through the flawless execution of rational logic. And somehow, I don't see a "broader" definition working in the favor of the public (i.e. less waste, more fault tolerant systems), but strictly in favor of mega corporations.
  2. If we let the public opinion mix up "computers" with the LLMs that are running on them, we will get even more restrictive ultra-broad legislation against the general public. Think "3D printers ownership heavily restricted because some people printed guns with them" but on an unprecedented scale. All we will have left are smartphones, because we are not their owners.
[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

You'll care if you're trying to sue someone and you want to win.