Artificial Intelligence and the Fight Against Racism in California
California is at the forefront of two important movements – the reparations conversation and the fight against algorithmic bias. These two movements are not wholly unrelated. Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms have been used to perpetuate racism and inequality in the state, and moving forward, repairing the damage done will demand a critical eye towards technology. The AI industry in America is worth over $1 trillion, with companies using algorithms to moderate content on social media, screen college applications, review job resumes, generate fake photos and artwork, interpret movement data collected on the border areas, and identify suspects in criminal investigations.
Background: California’s Reparations Conversation
In 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill that established a task force to study the economic impacts of slavery and systemic discrimination in the state. The task force comprised of ten members with expertise in economics, history, human rights, and law. The goal of the task force was to develop recommendations for reparations that the state could make to the descendants of enslaved people in California.
The task force has not yet determined an exact figure for the compensation, but the economists advising it estimate that the losses suffered by black Californians number in the hundreds of billions of dollars. However, it has not yet been determined if the compensation will actually be approved. The reparations conversation shows that California has a unique ability to deal with its troubled history, but that thinking doesn’t always extend into the future.
A Closer Look at AI Systems in California
AI systems are becoming an increasingly common tool in the tech industry. However, the more that these systems are used, the more it is clear that they are not neutral; they are trained in large data sets that include, for example, sexually exploitative material or discriminatory police data. As a result, they reproduce and magnify the worst biases in our society. For example, racial recognition software used in police investigations often misidentifies black and brown people. AI-based mortgage lenders are more likely to deny home loans to people of color, helping perpetuate housing inequities.
California has had some high-profile instances of AI being used to perpetuate racism. Recently, it was reported that Amazon’s Rekognition software incorrectly identified 28 members of Congress as criminals. The false matches were disproportionately people of color, despite the fact that Congress is overwhelmingly white.
AI systems are also used widely within California’s judicial system. Judges and lawyers use algorithms to make predictions about the likelihood that someone will reoffend or fail to appear in court. However, these algorithms are often biased against people of color, because they are based on biased databases. The danger is that judges and lawyers may unknowingly base critical decisions on racist inputs.
Banning Algorithmic Bias in California
In April, two legislators introduced a bill in the State Assembly that attempts to ban algorithmic bias. The bill is aimed at tech companies and other firms that use algorithms to make decisions that are important to people’s lives, such as hiring decisions or criminal justice assessments. Assembly Bill 13 would require companies to have human review mechanisms for their algorithms and to produce public reports on algorithmic bias. Companies that violate the law could face penalties of up to $1 million.
The Writers Guild of America, which is currently on strike, has included limits on the use of AI in its lawsuits. Resistance to excess also comes from within the tech industry. Three years ago, Timnit Gebru, head of Google’s ethical AI team, was fired after she sounded the alarm about the dangers of language models like GPT-3. But now even tech executives have grown wary: In his Senate testimony, Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI, admitted that AI systems must be regulated.
California: Leading the Way in the Fight Against Racism
The question we must ask ourselves with both reparations and AI in the end is not so different from the one that arose when a Franciscan friar set out on the Camino Real in 1769. It’s not so much “What will the future be like?” – although that’s an exciting question – but “Who will have the right to the future? Who might benefit from social repair or new technology, and who might be harmed?” The answer could well be decided in California. As the state moves forward in the reparations conversation, it is also leading the way in the fight against algorithmic bias.
Additional Piece
AI has become an increasingly ubiquitous presence in recent years, with the technology being used in a wide range of applications and industries. While AI has enormous potential to revolutionize the world of technology and beyond, it is also apparent that the technology comes with significant risks and drawbacks. One of the most significant risks associated with AI is the perpetuation of racist biases. As AI systems are trained on large data sets, they often reflect the biases and assumptions of the people who created them. The result is that AI systems can end up perpetuating racial stereotypes and inequalities.
The use of AI in California is of particular concern, given the state’s history of racism and discrimination. As the home of Hollywood, the tech industry, and many other influential cultural forces, California is in a unique position to shape national and global discourse on issues of race and inequality. It is therefore critical that California’s regulators, lawmakers, and tech executives take a proactive approach to combating algorithmic bias and creating a fairer and more just future.
One potential solution to the problem of algorithmic bias is to prioritize the use of ethical AI frameworks. These frameworks would require companies and organizations to train their AI systems on diverse data sets and reject data sets that contain biased information. Additionally, ethical AI frameworks would require companies and organizations to be transparent about how their AI systems are trained and how decisions are made using that data. These measures would help to ensure that AI systems are fairer and more just, reflecting the ideals of the communities they are designed to serve.
Another way to combat algorithmic bias is to support efforts to promote diversity in the tech industry. The tech industry has long had a reputation as a male-dominated industry, with very few minorities represented in executive positions. By promoting diversity in the tech industry, we can ensure that the people who create AI systems come from a wider range of backgrounds, which can help to mitigate the biases and assumptions that often permeate AI design.
Finally, it is critical that we continue to have open and honest conversations about the role of AI in perpetuating inequality. As AI systems become increasingly ubiquitous, it is essential that we remain vigilant in our efforts to ensure that they are used responsibly and ethically. By staying informed and engaged, we can help to create a more just and equitable society for everyone.
Summary
California is addressing two critical movements; the reparations conversation, which was established in 2019, and the fight against algorithmic bias. The state is home to companies that use algorithms in sectors such as social media, college applications, job resumes, fake photos, artwork, interpret movement data, and identify criminal suspects. There have been instances of AI perpetuating racism through these companies. The state is committed to banning algorithmic bias by requiring reviews and demanding public reports on this issue. Encouraging diversity is also viewed as a potential solution to address this issue. Overall, California needs to address the issue of being tagged as being racist and discriminative, which can be achieved with the implementation of appropriate regulations and aid from lawmakers and tech executives.
—————————————————-
| Article | Link |
|---|---|
| UK Artful Impressions | Premiere Etsy Store |
| Sponsored Content | View |
| 90’s Rock Band Review | View |
| Ted Lasso’s MacBook Guide | View |
| Nature’s Secret to More Energy | View |
| Ancient Recipe for Weight Loss | View |
| MacBook Air i3 vs i5 | View |
| You Need a VPN in 2023 – Liberty Shield | View |
While the task force hasn’t set an exact figure for how descendants of enslaved people could be compensated for excessive surveillance, mass incarceration and housing discrimination, the economists advising it estimate that losses suffered by the state’s black residents could number in the hundreds of billions. of dollars It has not yet been determined if the compensation will actually be approved.
The reparations conversation shows that California has a unique ability to deal with its troubled history. But that thinking doesn’t always extend into the future. Artificial intelligence systems are used to moderate content on social media, screen college applications, review job resumes, generate fake photos and artwork, interpret movement data collected in the border area, and identify suspects in investigations. criminals. Language models like ChatGPT, created by San Francisco-based startup OpenAI, have also drawn a lot of attention for their potential to disrupt fields like design, law, and education.
But if the success of AI can be measured in multi-billion dollar valuations and lucrative IPOs, its failures are burdened by ordinary people. AI systems are not neutral; they are trained in large data sets that include, for example, sexually exploitative material or discriminatory police data. As a result, they reproduce and magnify the worst biases in our society. For example, racial recognition software used in police investigations often misidentifies black and brown people. AI-based mortgage lenders are more likely to deny home loans to people of color, helping perpetuate housing inequities.
This would seem to be a time when we can apply historical thinking to the question of technology, so that we can prevent the injustices that have resulted from previous paradigm-altering shifts from happening again. In April, two legislators introduced a bill in the State Assembly that attempts to ban algorithmic bias. The Writers Guild of America, which is currently on strike, has included limits on the use of AI in its lawsuits. Resistance to excess also comes from within the tech industry. Three years ago, Timnit Gebru, head of Google’s ethical AI team, was fired after she sounded the alarm about the dangers of language models like GPT-3. But now even tech executives have grown wary: In his Senate testimony, Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI, admitted that AI systems must be regulated.
The question we face with both the repairs and the AI in the end is not so different from the one that arose when a Franciscan friar set out on the Camino Real in 1769. It’s not so much “What will the future be like?” — although that’s an exciting question — but “Who will have the right to the future? Who might benefit from social repair or new technology, and who might be harmed? The answer could well be decided in California.
Laila Lalami He is the author of four novels, including “The Other Americans.” His most recent book is a non-fiction work, “Citizens Conditional.” She lives in Los Angeles. benjamin marra He is an illustrator, cartoonist and art director. His illustrations for Numero Group’s “Wayfaring Strangers: Acid Nightmares” were nominated for a Grammy.
—————————————————-