Reconfiguring Diversity and Inclusion for AI Ethics

Nicole Chi, Emma Lurie, D. Mulligan
{"title":"Reconfiguring Diversity and Inclusion for AI Ethics","authors":"Nicole Chi, Emma Lurie, D. Mulligan","doi":"10.1145/3461702.3462622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Activists, journalists, and scholars have long raised critical questions about the relationship between diversity, representation, and structural exclusions in data-intensive tools and services. We build on work mapping the emergent landscape of corporate AI ethics to center one outcome of these conversations: the incorporation of diversity and inclusion in corporate AI ethics activities. Using interpretive document analysis and analytic tools from the values in design field, we examine how diversity and inclusion work is articulated in public-facing AI ethics documentation produced by three companies that create application and services layer AI infrastructure: Google, Microsoft, and Salesforce. We find that as these documents make diversity and inclusion more tractable to engineers and technical clients, they reveal a drift away from civil rights justifications that resonates with the \"managerialization of diversity\" by corporations in the mid-1980s. The focus on technical artifacts - such as diverse and inclusive datasets - and the replacement of equity with fairness make ethical work more actionable for everyday practitioners. Yet, they appear divorced from broader DEI initiatives and relevant subject matter experts that could provide needed context to nuanced decisions around how to operationalize these values and new solutions. Finally, diversity and inclusion, as configured by engineering logic, positions firms not as \"ethics owners\" but as ethics allocators; while these companies claim expertise on AI ethics, the responsibility of defining who diversity and inclusion are meant to protect and where it is relevant is pushed downstream to their customers.","PeriodicalId":197336,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3461702.3462622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Activists, journalists, and scholars have long raised critical questions about the relationship between diversity, representation, and structural exclusions in data-intensive tools and services. We build on work mapping the emergent landscape of corporate AI ethics to center one outcome of these conversations: the incorporation of diversity and inclusion in corporate AI ethics activities. Using interpretive document analysis and analytic tools from the values in design field, we examine how diversity and inclusion work is articulated in public-facing AI ethics documentation produced by three companies that create application and services layer AI infrastructure: Google, Microsoft, and Salesforce. We find that as these documents make diversity and inclusion more tractable to engineers and technical clients, they reveal a drift away from civil rights justifications that resonates with the "managerialization of diversity" by corporations in the mid-1980s. The focus on technical artifacts - such as diverse and inclusive datasets - and the replacement of equity with fairness make ethical work more actionable for everyday practitioners. Yet, they appear divorced from broader DEI initiatives and relevant subject matter experts that could provide needed context to nuanced decisions around how to operationalize these values and new solutions. Finally, diversity and inclusion, as configured by engineering logic, positions firms not as "ethics owners" but as ethics allocators; while these companies claim expertise on AI ethics, the responsibility of defining who diversity and inclusion are meant to protect and where it is relevant is pushed downstream to their customers.
重新配置人工智能伦理的多样性和包容性
长期以来,活动家、记者和学者们一直对数据密集型工具和服务中的多样性、代表性和结构性排斥之间的关系提出关键问题。我们在绘制企业人工智能伦理新兴图景的工作基础上,以这些对话的一个结果为中心:将多样性和包容性纳入企业人工智能伦理活动。使用来自设计领域价值的解释性文档分析和分析工具,我们研究了谷歌、微软和Salesforce这三家创建应用程序和服务层人工智能基础设施的公司如何在面向公众的人工智能伦理文档中阐述多样性和包容性工作。我们发现,由于这些文件使多样性和包容性对工程师和技术客户来说更容易处理,它们揭示了一种偏离民权理由的趋势,这与20世纪80年代中期企业的“多样性管理化”产生了共鸣。对技术产物(如多样化和包容性的数据集)的关注,以及用公平取代公平,使道德工作对日常从业人员来说更具可操作性。然而,他们似乎脱离了更广泛的DEI倡议和相关主题专家,这些专家可以为如何实施这些价值观和新解决方案的细微决策提供所需的背景。最后,由工程逻辑配置的多样性和包容性,将企业定位为道德分配者,而不是“道德所有者”;虽然这些公司声称在人工智能伦理方面具有专业知识,但定义多样性和包容性意味着保护谁以及与何处相关的责任却被推到了下游的客户身上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信