“Our work suggests that a lot of what we view as gerrymandering may instead result from the complexity of the task. It’s beyond human abilities to perfectly group millions of people into fair districts”https://www.seeker.com/tech/an-unbiased-algorithm-could-help-put-an-end-to-partisan-gerrymandering?utm_content=An+Unbiased+Algorithm+Could+Help+Put+an+End+to+Partisan+Gerrymandering&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social-media …
-
-
Replying to @o_guest
Wouldn't that be a small revolution? Are there any precedents for generating public trust in an algorithm (and its implementation)? Today it's more like 1) public trusts experts, 2) experts use algorithms/computers.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @khinsen
I'm not sure that's what we're arguing. I think the preprint clarifies our views: https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.04640
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
I think it's implicit. Much like with electronic voting machines. People agree on what the machines should do but don't trust that they actually do exactly that.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @khinsen
The whole point is that we want open source software and an open debate on the results of all redistricting algorithms. See the Discussion section for more details on this.
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
Exactly - which is what I think would be a small revolution. Not the open debate, but trust though open source in the context of political decisions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @khinsen
A computational algorithm might not have had its trust evaluated under a system of openness (explicit open source checking). But there are many algorithms that aren't explicitly implemented in a programming language that humans trust for political decisions, like voting methods
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
Indeed, but the execution of human-run algorithms can also be verified by humans. As in recounting. These are well-understood and trusted procedures.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @khinsen
It's experts/a minority of the whole of the population with special status/trust that do the recounting just like it would be a minority that would be able to verify the code even if everybody could download it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
Right. But today's network of trust (individuals, institutions, rules) has grown over centuries and is not at all adapted to dealing with trust in machines and software. Little overlap with today's computer-literate communities.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.