> > Detailed, readable documentation (which is accessible directly from the > search interface)
Yup, totally agree. But, in real life, who reads the documentation anyway? ;) -- deb tankersley irc: debt Product Manager, Discovery Wikimedia Foundation On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Jonathan Morgan <[email protected]> wrote: > When I read this article, I wasn't struck that the author was saying she > thought that technology "owed" her particular results. > > I think the point she's making is that so much of our life now is mediated > by algorithms that make choices we may not understand, and that impacts how > we see the world in ways we can't easily anticipate or account for > (supporting quotes below). And the problem is subtler and more pervasive > than simply issues of "filter bubbles" and "fake news" that are currently > garnering the biggest headlines. > > This is part of a broader conversation that happening right now around > algorithmic transparency and "ethical AI". Lots and lots of big names are > weighing in on the topic[1][2][3][4][5][6]. > > I haven't see a whole lot of specific design guidance around how to > support transparency in the context of search yet, but I'd be interested in > hearing from others who have. Detailed, readable documentation (which is > accessible directly from the search interface) sounds like a pretty good > start :) > > - Jonathan > > > > > > *"I am still not accustomed to the drastic ways search algorithms can > direct people’s lives. We’re so used to Google’s suggested spellings and > the autocorrect of texting apps that we’ve stopped thinking too hard about > how we search or how we spell. If I tap out Chrissy but should have typed > Krissy, I implicitly believe that of course the opaque algorithms of > Facebook will intuit my intent. But we have no way of probing the limits of > the algorithms that govern our lives.""When we talk about the algorithms > that drive sites like Google and Facebook, we marvel at their cleverness in > serving us information, or we worry about the ways in which they exacerbate > bias—profiling people based on gross data trends, for example, to decide > who gets a loan and who doesn’t. But there is a complex web of algorithmic > life-shaping at work that we barely register. It’s not that I wish Facebook > treated its Cs and Ks alike. It’s that by not knowing the rules, we give up > some agency to mathematical calculations."* > > 1. https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/public-policy/2017_usacm_ > statement_algorithms.pdf > 2. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2908372/the-ftc-is- > worried-about-algorithmic-transparency-and-you-should-be-too.html > 3. http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/02/08/theme-7-the-need- > grows-for-algorithmic-literacy-transparency-and-oversight/ > 4. https://epic.org/algorithmic-transparency/ > 5. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603915/tech-giants-grapple-with-the- > ethical-concerns-raised-by-the-ai-boom/ > 6. https://cyber.harvard.edu/research/ai > > > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Trey Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks for sharing, Chris! >> >> I found the article a bit frustrating. As a human interest story, it's >> very touching that the sisters were able to reconnect despite family >> problems that worked to keep them apart. >> >> But from the technology side of things, blaming search algorithms seems >> odd to me. I'm surprised that anyone would feel that technology owed them >> particular results or specific capabilities—especially capabilities they >> didn't even know they needed. That might actually be a useful insight into >> our own users, though. >> >> I'm also surprised the author didn't use anything other than search >> engines and social media. I've had to track down a dozen or so people who >> were out of touch for up to 20+ years, for a book project, and there are so >> many resources out there! Even more if you are able to spend a few dollars >> per person—which "book project people" did not warrant, but siblings would. >> >> So, getting a bit more on-topic, how do we help people by not only >> providing them with useful information, but also the tools and processes >> that allow them to get the most from that information? It seems like >> documentation works for very sophisticated users, but the rest have to >> collectively and very unevenly accrete familiarity with tools over time; >> learning/teaching processes seems even more daunting. I can't see a way to >> accelerate that process, which is disheartening. >> >> —Trey >> >> Trey Jones >> Software Engineer, Discovery >> Wikimedia Foundation >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Chris Koerner <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks to Erica Litrenta for sharing this with me. I thought I'd share >>> if forward. >>> >>> "It was because of the letter K that I found my younger sister, but for >>> 14 years, it was also the letter K that kept us apart." >>> >>> https://www.wired.com/story/search-algorithms-kept-me-from-m >>> y-sister-for-14-years >>> >>> Yours, >>> Chris Koerner >>> Community Liaison >>> Wikimedia Foundation >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> discovery mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> discovery mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery >> >> > > > -- > Jonathan T. Morgan > Senior Design Researcher > Wikimedia Foundation > User:Jmorgan (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)> > > > _______________________________________________ > discovery mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery > >
_______________________________________________ discovery mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery
