Focused Read in 3-4 minutes
Personal Commentary ~
In recent days, as Facebook has been presented as the root of all evil, by many, in 21st Century data collection in the Halls of Congress I've been reminded of the limited view we can have -- especially when our frustration can be so easily soothed by, in this case, publicly holding a big company accountable for said frustration. In this case, data collection.
Please don't misunderstand. I am of the mind that it is way past time to pause and to review our cyber world and to adapt as needed. I just think we need to recognize the scope of the issue at hand. "Algorithms Are Making Government Decisions.
The Public Needs To Have A Say." is one in a series of pieces that speaks to -- some of that scope!
⬇
"Algorithms Are Making Government Decisions.
The Public Needs To Have A Say.
(By, Dillon Reisman, a Technology Fellow at the AI Now Institute;
Meredith Whittaker, a co-founder of the AI Now Institute, a Distinguished Research Scientist at New York University, and the founder of Google’s Open Research group;
Kate Crawford, a co-founder of the AI Now Institute, Distinguished Research Professor at NYU, a Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research, and a leading scholar of the social implications of data systems, machine learning, and artificial intelligence.)
AI and automated decision systems are reshaping core social domains, from criminal justice and education, to health care and beyond.
Yet it remains incredibly difficult to assess and measure the nature and impact of these systems, even as research has shown their potential for biased and inaccurate decisions that harm the most vulnerable.
These systems often function in oblique, invisible ways that are not subject to the accountability or oversight the public expects.
Consider how a lack of such public oversight hit the New Orleans community. In 2012, the New Orleans Police Department contracted with the data analytics company Palantir to build a state-of-the-art predictive policing system, designed to help the police identify people in the New Orleans community who are likely to commit violence or become the victim of violence.
(Emphasis by underlining is mine.)
The accuracy and usefulness of such predictive policing and “heat mapping” approaches are very much in question.
Recent research has demonstrated that predictive policing has great potential to disparately impact communities of color, amplifying existing patterns of discrimination in policing.Other research has raised doubts about whether predictive policing is effective at all.
... This controversial and potentially biased system was put in place with no oversight. Until a report in The Verge last month, even members of the New Orleans City Council had no idea what their own police department was doing.
(Emphasis by underlining is mine.)
Other jurisdictions are similarly grappling with the lack of oversight over invisible automated systems.
This is why we at AI Now released a report on Monday detailing our proposed accountability framework for “Algorithmic Impact Assessments."
AIAs provide a strong foundation on which oversight and accountability practices can be built, by giving policymakers, stakeholders, and the public the means to understand and govern the AI and automated decision systems used by core government agencies.
Algorithmic Impact Assessments would first give the public the basic knowledge it needs through disclosure.
Before procuring a new automated decision system, agencies would be required to publicly disclose information on the system’s purpose, reach, and potential impact on legally protected classes of people.
(Emphasis by underlining is mine.)
Beyond such disclosure, agencies would also be required to provide an accounting of a system’s workings and impact, including any biases or discriminatory behavior the system might perpetuate.
... this would be accomplished...by engaging with external researchers and stakeholders, and ensuring that they have meaningful access to an automated decision system.
These external researchers must include people from a broad array of disciplines and experience.
Finally, agencies would need to honor the public’s right to due process.
This means ensuring that meaningful public engagement is integrated into all stages of the AIA process before, during, and after the assessment through a “notice and comment” process, through which agencies solicit public feedback on their assessments.
This would be a chance for the public to raise their concerns and, in some cases, even challenge whether an agency should adopt a particular automated decision system.
Additionally, if an agency fails to adequately complete an AIA, or if harms go unaddressed by the agency, the public should have some method of recourse.
In developing AIA legislation, lawmakers will need to address several points." (Think funding, private vendors and transparency...)
"... The rise of automated decision systems has already had and will continue to have an impact on the most vulnerable people.
That’s why communities across the country need far more insight into government’s use of these systems, and far more control over which systems are used to shape their lives.
... This piece is part of a series exploring the impacts of artificial intelligence on civil liberties. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of the ACLU."
You can read more here
( You can read the referenced report: Algorithmic Impact
Assessments: A Practical Framework For Public Agency Accountability here )
( Courtesy of the ACLU )
Focused Thought in 15 seconds
Focused Action in 30 seconds
You can share Bryan Dawson's Tweet here
Focused Point of Interest
in 2 minutes
"Vermont governor signs bill that raises age to buy firearms, makes it easier to take guns from people who pose threat
Vermont on Wednesday raised the age to buy firearms, banned high-capacity magazines and made it easier to take guns from people who pose a threat —
the first significant gun ownership restrictions in state history, signed into law by the Republican governor.
It’s a remarkable turnaround for the largely rural state that traditionally has refused to impose restrictions on gun ownership.
... “This is not the time to do what’s easy, it’s time to do what’s right,” the governor said.
Scott, a gun owner, had urged the Legislature to pass gun restrictions in the aftermath of what police called a narrowly averted school shooting in Fair Haven by a teenager.
He said the incident proved to him that Vermont isn’t immune from the school violence that has plagued other parts of the country.
... Vermont’s new gun laws are mild by some standards. But they are part of a trend of states passing gun restrictions, prompted in part by the Florida mass shooting, said Robert Spitzer, a political science professor at the State University of New York at Cortland who has written books on gun policy.
“There has been movement in a number of states,” Spitzer said. But Vermont is significant “because Vermont is traditionally such a strong gun-rights state and has not moved in this direction in ages, if ever,” he said.
While gun control advocates have praised Vermont’s new laws, the state’s traditionally powerful gun rights advocates and members of the outdoor community feel betrayed by Scott...
During debate on the legislation, many firearms owners milled around the Statehouse halls wearing hunter orange vests or hats.
During debate on the legislation, many firearms owners milled around the Statehouse halls wearing hunter orange vests or hats.
“The tyranny of democracy has overwhelmed the protections of my constitutional, individual rights,” said Bill Moore, a firearms policy analyst for the Vermont Traditions Coalition who fought against the gun restrictions.
Gun rights advocates in the state generally support taking guns away from people deemed dangerous or prone to domestic violence, both covered by the new legislation.
But they fiercely oppose provisions in the laws that raise the age to buy firearms from 18 to 21, restrict the size of gun magazines and require background checks for most private gun sales.
But they fiercely oppose provisions in the laws that raise the age to buy firearms from 18 to 21, restrict the size of gun magazines and require background checks for most private gun sales.
On Tuesday, a bipartisan group of Vermont lawmakers urged Scott to veto the bill that contains the provisions they find onerous.
But supporters of the restrictions say the time has come in Vermont. ... "
You can read more here
.
.
.
→ Direct sources for Democrats:
* ( Personal favored and most informative follows are shared here with the understanding that readers will always apply their own critical thinking to any information provided anywhere by anyone. #StrongerTogether does not share sources of information lightly but -- no one is perfect! -- so always #DistrustAndVerify I am using a star rating that is strictly based on my situational experience with the work of the media personality specifically in relation to issues of interest to me. )
The Democratic Party Website
Also
C-SPAN (a good place for speeches & hearings direct source (s))
→ Fact checking organizations courtesy of the Society of Professional Journalists
in alphabetical order...
→ Some of my favorite, most informative
follows on Twitter include:
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ US Intelligence | Author | Navy Senior Chief | NBC/MSNBC
⭐⭐⭐ Federal Government Operations | Vanity Fair | Newsweek | MSNBC Contributor | Author
⭐⭐⭐⭐ Voting Rights/Voter Suppression | Author | Mother Jones
→ Some of the most credible media -- at the moment:
📰📰📰 Mother Jones
→ Some of the most credible Talking Heads -- at the moment -- and their Twitter handles:
( 📎 Interesting to note: Wallace, a former Republican (or an inactive Republican I believe she calls herself) is new to the job but for right now she has clearly put country over party and her work on Trump GOP has been credible, IMO... )
...for Networking for Democrats today!
g. (Unapologetic Democrat)
g. (Unapologetic Democrat)
📎 Note: I rarely get involved in primary races -- outside of those in my own area. And, unless there is a glaring reason that can not be ignored, I support Democratic Party nominees winning in general elections.
.
.
.
(Linked) "...is our 2016 platform...a declaration of how we plan to move America forward. Democrats believe that cooperation is better than conflict, unity is better than division, empowerment is better than resentment, and bridges are better than walls.
It’s a simple but powerful idea: We are stronger together."
Eleanor Roosevelt with female reporters
at her first White House press conference
on March 6, 1933.
“ … At first Eleanor Roosevelt adhered to her own...political topics. She told about her daily schedules, discussed the prints on the White House Walls, and shared low-cost menus for Depression-era households. But reporters pressed the First Lady for more news on public policy, and the press conference sessions soon broadened their scope. As early as April 1933 Eleanor Roosevelt provided a political scoop; she announced that beer would be served in the White House once Prohibition ended. By the end of 1933, according to UP reporter Ruby Black, the First Lady had defended low cost housing, the subsistence homestead program, equal pay for equal work, old age pensions, and the minimum wage. “Tea Pouring Items Give Way to Big News,” Black declared. “No newspaperwoman could have asked for better luck,” reporter Bess Furman recalled. The First Lady, she wrote, “conducts classes on scores of subjects, always seeing beyond her immediate hearers to ‘the women of the country.’” … “ ( You can read more here )
( #its2018now )
*
Curated by Gail Mountain, with occasional personal commentary, Network For #StrongerTogether ! is not affiliated with The Democratic Party in any capacity. This is an independent blog and the hope is you will, at a glance, learn more about the Party and you will, with a click or two, also take action on its behalf as it is provided!
*
See the League of Women Voters website:
Vote411 here
*
Thank you for Focusing!
g., aka Focused Democrat
✊ Resisting "Fake News"
No comments:
Post a Comment