Instigator / Pro
Points: 10

Artificial Intelligence on balance is biased against African Americans

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 9 votes the winner is ...
oromagi
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Science
Time for argument
One week
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
7,500
Contender / Con
Points: 63
Description
No information
Round 1
Forfeited
Published:
thx, wylted

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE on BALANCE is BIASED AGAINST AFRICAN AMERICANS


"truthbomb has been banned indefinitely, for multi-accounting (alt of Singularity).

Without prompting, expert multi-level analysis was offered comparing behavioral trends, topic selection, and more.

This type of thing can be done as a statistical simulation, to which at the very most basic we could use the Poisson distribution to determine the odds of any two interchangeable users in any notable metric (being a dedicated voter, being a Karen, etc.) showing up within differing amounts of time. It's basically null for W2 to appear independently of W1's banning within that time interval. Still possible of course, but highly doubtful.

Time was given for any new behavior to counter this, but none presented itself. This being a ban without absolute certainty, but weighted based on the need to protect the underage portion of the website against harm. It may be appealed by emailing: [email protected]."
Since PRO has neglected to set any terms for this debate and is not likely to offer any in future, CON is at liberty to set terms.

DEFINITIONS:

ARTIFICIAL is "man-made; of artifice"

INTELLIGENCE is "capacity of mind, especially to understand principles, truths, facts or meanings, acquire knowledge, and apply it to practice; the ability to comprehend and learn"

ON BALANCE is "overall, when all factors are taken into account"

BIASED is the past tense of BIAS
BIAS is "inclination towards something; predisposition, partiality, prejudice, preference, predilection"

AFRICAN AMERICAN is "an ethnic group of Americans with total or partial ancestry from any of the black racial groups of Africa.  The phrase generally refers to descendants of enslaved black people who are from the United States"

BURDEN of PROOF:

Wikipedia advises:

"When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim especially when it challenges a perceived status quo"

CON interprets the resolution to mean that PRO must prove that machines programmed to mimic human thought preponderantly exhibit prejudgement based on pigment and ancestry.

PRO:

  • PRO has forfeited and is unlikely to return to this debate

CON:

  • By definition, AI is a tool made by humans and (as yet, at least) incapable of decision-making or cognition independent of human design  or programming.
    • As such, no machine has any innate capacity for weighing any comparison disproportionately.  All such programming necessarily reflects the closed-minded and unfair thinking of humans.
    • Race is a human emotional bias based on dividing humans into social subsets according to phenotype. 
      • Machines and other tools are incapable of emotion. 
    • Machines and other tools are incapable of categorization independent of human schema.
  • Therefore, any evidence PRO might have presented for the application of the adjective BIASED
    • (such as this Wired story from last year:
    • "researchers have found problems lurking in the ImageNet data. An algorithm trained with the data might, for example, assume that programmers are white men because the pool of images labeled “programmer” were skewed that way.")
    • must fail to prove PRO's conclusion.
  • The premise that AI is capable of evaluating a subject using its own criteria is false.  All criteria are ultimately of human origin. 
  • Since AI must be capable of originating bias before AI may be credited for biased judgement, PRO's premise is shown to be false.
Round 2
Forfeited
Published:
extend to R3

Guadalajara Cemetery

You sort the tin paintings
and lay your favorite in my lap.
Then you stroke my bare feet
as I lean against a tombstone.
It's time to cross the border
and cut your throat with two knives:
your wife, your son.
I won't try to stop you.
A cow with a mouth at both ends
chews hell going and coming.
I never asked less.
You, me, these withered flowers,
so many hearts tied in a knot,
given and taken away.

-Ai

Round 3
Forfeited
Published:
extend all arguments to R4

"Before we work on artificial intelligence why don’t we do something about natural stupidity?”

—Steve Polyak
Round 4
Forfeited
Published:
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE on BALANCE is BIASED AGAINST AFRICAN AMERICANS

PRO:

  • As anticipated, PRO had offered no argument due to site ban

CON:

  • Therefore, PRO dropped all arguments.
    • The premise that AI is capable of evaluating a subject using its own criteria is false.  All criteria are ultimately of human origin. 
    • Since AI must be capable of originating bias before AI may be credited for biased judgement, PRO's premise is shown to be false.

CONCLUSION

PRO failed to prove that machines programmed to mimic human thought preponderantly exhibit prejudgement based on pigment and ancestry.

  • CON recommends that VOTERs award CON a WIN by full forfeit.
  • Thanks to truthbomb for the interesting topic and
  • Thanks to all VOTERs for their kind consideration.
PLEASE VOTE CON!

Added:
=>"When I debated someone who was a likely alt, even while I liked the quality I put in, I deleted it when they failed to rise above suspicion."
oh, you are a better man than I then. I would definitely have kept that one.
Contender
#13
Added:
--> @RationalMadman
Erik is someone who made it their mission to troll every debate in the challenge period, then started creating obvious alt accounts to continue this when restricted from accepting debates. I trust your intelligence to know he was active at the time. That you were harmed by the few minutes to recreate your debate rather than given a free win, sucks, but it still doesn't relate well to this debate.
If low effort wins are your concern, you have three from the original Erik account. You even got called out for farming him, but those debates remain in place.
As for if I'm corrupt... When I debated someone who was a likely alt, even while I liked the quality I put in, I deleted it when they failed to rise above suspicion.
#12
Added:
--> @Ragnar
that has nothing to do with it. I didn't know before I created my debate that ErikT would accept it. Checkmate and you are being corrupt but there is no doubt that Oromagi will always be favoured by corruption.
#11
Added:
--> @RationalMadman, @Ragnar
It may also seem relevant that truthbomb personally challenged me to this debate. He created an earlier public version which I commented on but did not accept.
Contender
#10
Added:
--> @Ragnar
No, I did not.
Contender
#9
Added:
--> @oromagi
Did you know prior to accepting this debate that Truthbomb would be banned?
#8
Added:
--> @Ragnar
No it isn't. Oromagi displays complete knowledge in Round 1 that it's a banned user he's debating against.
#7
Added:
--> @RationalMadman
That's also an apple to oranges comparison. Just look at the dates involved.
EricT, EricTbiggestfan, EricT2, Eric were all rather obviously the same person, with the alts deleted the same day they were created.
Nothing is preventing you from recreating any debates for topics you wish to argue.
#6
Added:
--> @Ragnar
In Round 1 he posts the ban, meaning even before posting Round 1 he knew.
#5
Added:
--> @Ragnar
My debate was accepted by an alt of ErikT and you deleted it. Where's the foreknowledge there?
#4
Added:
--> @RationalMadman, @oromagi
That is an apple to oranges comparison. This is a single debate, accepted presumably without knowledge that it would end in full forfeiture.
I did however delete all Truthbomb debates which were in the challenge period, to prevent free win farming.
#3
Added:
--> @Ragnar
You should delete this debate, I had 14 wins denied to me by bsh1 deleting me debating type1 alts.
#2
Added:
Are machines inputted of racist information or they will develop so on their own actions?
#1
#9
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
As this is a full forfeit, I have liberty to highlight a superlative argument by Con that transcends this debate while making the best argument in the four rounds. Round three's argument takes the debate to the high ground of relevance. Well done, oromagi.
#8
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full Forfeit.
#7
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full forfeiture.
#6
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full Forfeit.
#5
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
FF .
#4
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
FULL FORFEIT
#3
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full Forfeit
#2
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
full forfeit
#1
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full Forfeit.