In my undergraduate thesis, I used a mood recognition tool to collect and analyze comments below the videos to find the audience’s emotion towards the videos’ topic, so I am interested in the natural language processing. The method of the bag of words is a really classical method of machine learning, building a dictionary with words, transforming the text into a specific vector so that the computer can understand and setting some words and rules to make the result more accurate. Outside the black box, we can just find the data in and the result out, while inside the black box, we can see the design and idea of human through the process of machine learning. It’s similar to the idea of the article of Johnson and Verdicchio. The autonomy of AI is limited by designer. Although we do not know how the AI deal with the data, but we can limit the result by the analog input and the actuators.
When come to the topic between AI and designer, it seems like that the article of Johnson and Verdicchio considers AI as a type of tool. It points out that the AI discourse neglects human actors and human behavior and emphasizes the effect of designer which can limit the AI. The designer should be responsible for AI. But I am concerned whether this statement ignores the users of AI. In reality, more and more AI are open to individual. When we pay attention on the responsibility of AI’s designer, should we also consider the responsibility of AI’s users? For example, the mood recognition can be used to determine customers’ feeling about a product, but it can also be used to monitor the public opinion.
Alpaydin, E. (n.d.). Machine Learning. MACHINE LEARNING, 225.
Johnson, D. G., & Verdicchio, M. (2017). Reframing AI Discourse. Minds and Machines, 27(4), 575–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-017-9417-6