Skip to navigationSkip to content
Close
We need a new Bill of Rights to protect us from algorithms, Wharton professor says

We need a new Bill of Rights to protect us from algorithms, Wharton professor says

Read more on MarketWatch

Contributions

  • This direction makes sense for two reasons. First, in cases where there are potentially irreversible outcomes (e.g., safety), regulation is and should be accepted. This is especially true in high leverage situations (where a small number of actors affect a large number of people). Second, Facebook and

    This direction makes sense for two reasons. First, in cases where there are potentially irreversible outcomes (e.g., safety), regulation is and should be accepted. This is especially true in high leverage situations (where a small number of actors affect a large number of people). Second, Facebook and Alphabet, among many other companies, have illustrated an inability to overcome their desire for growth and profit to address safety or inequity. Even in service of technological progress, the ambition of a company can make it more aggressive than it should be, e.g., Tesla’s Autopilot. The call for transparency and auditability is a good one; it’s not prescriptive about how companies should solve technical challenges, it simply demands that others be able to look at it. Looking forward to reading Hosanagar’s book and seeing if this call to action is heeded.

  • I’m on board for this. I wrote last year in my “new tech manifesto” of our need to establish some new rules for this new world we are coding. The original six principles have expanded to eight thanks to the contributions of others in the open source version.

    You can find it all at bit.ly/datachimp

    I’m on board for this. I wrote last year in my “new tech manifesto” of our need to establish some new rules for this new world we are coding. The original six principles have expanded to eight thanks to the contributions of others in the open source version.

    You can find it all at bit.ly/datachimp

    Like climate change, the new world coming due to networked technologies gives us a chance to fix some bad design in our current system. There is so much wealth creation, art, and justice possible. But the basic foundation must be protected and that includes ideas of justice, transparency, and fairness. Black boxes hiding behind claims of proprietary business practices won’t work and are anti-democratic and anti-freedom.

  • Algorithmic power corrupts algorithmically...

  • Think about this. "The best algorithms are sufficiently sophisticated that programmers can’t always tell for certain how and why they reach the conclusions they do, Wharton professor Kartik Hosanagar writes in his new book “A Human’s Guide to Machine Intelligence.” “A.I. scientists often have no way

    Think about this. "The best algorithms are sufficiently sophisticated that programmers can’t always tell for certain how and why they reach the conclusions they do, Wharton professor Kartik Hosanagar writes in his new book “A Human’s Guide to Machine Intelligence.” “A.I. scientists often have no way to know what’s going on under the hood,” he says."

  • As individuals, we also need our own tools, data and AI to defend ourselves. User centric alternatives with clear, transparent governance are vital.

  • All for this though the difficulty will be in the effective operations of this kind of legislation. AI is like no other industrial or technical revolution with regards to the exponential speed of which it will scale and execute decisions. Traditional safeguards like bills of rights will be too slow and

    All for this though the difficulty will be in the effective operations of this kind of legislation. AI is like no other industrial or technical revolution with regards to the exponential speed of which it will scale and execute decisions. Traditional safeguards like bills of rights will be too slow and clunky to be effective and will need rethinking.

  • We have been thinking about this in the context of AI specifically and recently opened our governance project for public input. It’s called Propel - https://hubculture.com/propel and enables us to crowd develop rules and policies and to apply them to our AI for ongoing use.

  • One way to address this problem is to require that algorithms and AI demonstrate safety, efficacy, and freedom from bias, both before deployment and thereafter, a capability that should be implemented with additional code. It must be possible to review the logic for any decision, so the code would have

    One way to address this problem is to require that algorithms and AI demonstrate safety, efficacy, and freedom from bias, both before deployment and thereafter, a capability that should be implemented with additional code. It must be possible to review the logic for any decision, so the code would have to be transparent and auditable.

    The tech industry’s only priority is growth. That must change to protect consumers and the country as a whole.

  • There’s actually a growing community of commentators on YouTube in the more conservative and libertarian spheres who are advocating for an Internet Bill of Rights protecting someone to a certain degree from being deplatformed or having their income stripped from them. This could easily be added in to the overall concept.

  • No one is forcing anyone to use these stupid and ridiculous apps as core tools for our lives. The bill of rights doesn’t need to be changed, in fact, people should probably read them for the first time. And then we should reevaluate why we allow something as stupid as Facebook control our lives.

  • I agree with the majority of this article. Transparency in to these algorithms is important but if computer scientists are unable to tell how they reached a conclusion that leads into issues of understanding that will leave a laymen like myself completely lost. The other issue is keeping up with the

    I agree with the majority of this article. Transparency in to these algorithms is important but if computer scientists are unable to tell how they reached a conclusion that leads into issues of understanding that will leave a laymen like myself completely lost. The other issue is keeping up with the technology. Our legislature is deliberately slow to make sure there are no radical shocks to the system, but technology changes at an exponentially quicker pace that we may not be able to keep up with.

    But with that said I feel an internet bill of rights is important as a framework to build on.

    As to the commenter about how no one forces people to use apps, no one is forced to do a great multitude of things, it does not diminish our responsibility to protect those who do. You have a constitutional right to own firearms and vote, many do not care for either of those rights, but we enshrine those protections in the bill of rights to protect those that do

  • Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and the Federalist papers were all crafted in a different time and different era. The world has evolved and witnessed several major paradigm shifts, and both and industrial revolution as well as the internet and the new digital age. There is a definite need to re address

    Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and the Federalist papers were all crafted in a different time and different era. The world has evolved and witnessed several major paradigm shifts, and both and industrial revolution as well as the internet and the new digital age. There is a definite need to re address and review everything that our forefathers laid out, but it is really important to keep desperate and the direction of our great nation.

  • We already have rights and we have laws. Algorithms are written by people for the benefit of some people. The people that own algorithms are responsible for what if any damages. If there is no human supervision or control it is not a question of if but when things will go wrong. Want to buy Boeing?

  • Brilliant idea.

  • Mmmmm? Machines are certainly less concerned with feelings and rights.