"Hardly a day goes by without reports in newspapers, on the radio or on television about machines that can do many things better than humans. Still, very few of us know what artificial intelligence really is. Computer scientist Meredith Broussard says we confuse reality with Hollywood films. I want to know from her how this confusion comes about and why it is important in a democracy to bring the topic of artificial intelligence back to the ground."

“My guest, Ralph Müller-Eiselt from the German Bertelsmann Foundation, believes that, in many situations, automated decision-making can lead to fairer and better decisions. E. g. a computer algorithm preselecting job applications can find candidates who do not have a degree from a prestigious university but bring important personal skills that an HR manager might overlook. Such algorithms could also mitigate human prejudice that is part of every hiring process.

On the other hand, algorithms can also reinforce discrimination and a lack of transparency makes it very hard to understand and challenge automated decisions.

In the end, Müller-Eiselt says, whenever we build an automated decision-making system, we have to be very clear and transparent about our goals in order to make sure that the system actually does what we think it should do. Thus, Müller-Eiselt argues, building a decision-making algorithm can be an opportunity to reflect on and critically assess the way we take important decisions as humans. I think that is probably the most important point of the episode, that creating a computer algorithm that impacts people's lives can be an opportunity to think about how fair and transparent the decisions are that we as humans take. It can be like a mirror: we can delegate decisions to a machine only if we truly understand how we make decisions as humans.

Müller-Eiselt also thinks that we need a public debate about these systems. This does not mean that everyone must understand the technical details but we have to discuss the purposes and goals we want to use automated decision-making systems for. When I asked him if this debate doesn’t come way too late he said, not at all! It took us roughly 100 years since the invention of the car before seat belts have been declared mandatory – and we still haven’t solved the problem of greenhouse gas emissions. In other words: society needs time to adapt to new technologies and find ways to apply them safely and to the benefit of all. I think that’s a fair point. “

If we want to prevent the inevitable accumulation of waste on this planet, affirmations and how-to guides for sustainable shopping are not something that is going to help. We need guidelines that teach us how to change our habits and our view on sustainable living. Moreover, should those who promote sustainable living change their practices? Should all of their actions be driven and motivated by the Eco-friendly mindset? For example, if a minimalist blogger recommends a bamboo compostable soap dish, all of their readers will consider buying a new soap dish just because it seems more sustainable, but is it better to buy something new than to use what you already have? No matter the new thing is Eco-friendly or not. Or if we look at sustainable food bloggers, should they participate in the fetishization of exotic foods instead of using locally grown produce? Most likely sacrificing their outreach and growth through the process, since potato soup is not really a cool dish to talk about..

This illustration was commissioned by Amplitude Magazin for an article exploring the ethics of promoting eco-friendly products and the responsibility that comes with it. You can read the article and find out more about this topic here: Kako izveštavati o temama održivosti

Commissioned by Amplitude Magazin for an article that tackles the problems of influencer marketing during a pandemic.