Afternoon Session: Governance
Talkat Wrong at the Root: Racial Bias and the Tension Between Numbers and Words in Non-Internet Data · 2019-06-05..06-07·
summary
A participatory study runs five workshops, 83 participants in one US county using a tangible comfort board to test six fictional child‑welfare scenarios while toggling proactive vs reactive, human vs algorithmic, and data sources; families and frontline workers report low to moderate comfort, specialists higher, and more precise accuracy claims actually reduce trust. Panels argue supervised learning is often the wrong formulation, fairness metrics conflict, and governance must pair technical fixes with policy and relational redesign.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (11)
- 0:00Start
- 0:57RESEARCH TEAM
- 2:22THREE CENTRAL QUESTIONS
- 6:06METHODOLOGY: COMFORT BOARD
- 10:46A FICTIONAL SCENARIO
- 12:15SCENARIO STEPS
- 13:07WORKSHOPS
- 15:27SYSTEM LEVEL CONCERNS
- 16:22DATA CONTEXT CONCERNS
- 18:24ACCOUNTABILITY
- 21:18DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT
related talks
25mPanel: Ethics and Regulations in AI Governance
56mEthics in Machine Learning Panel
39mBuilding a Responsible AI Governance Program
01h 16mPROTECTING THE RIGHTS AND ENSURING THE FUTURE OF GENERATION AI
01h 21mDesigning Collective Technology Governance
35mFrom hype to responsibility: what works & matters for whom in data and AI?
31mEthics of algorithms - from theoretical discussion to practical application
01h 12mThe Role of Technology in Fostering the Power of Personal Data: Privacy, Trust & Innovation