When asked about the Lionesses’ victory in the Women’s World Cup semi-finals, Amazon’s voice assistant Alexa was unable to respond with an appropriate response to the question. Due to the fact that this endeavor was unsuccessful, the corporation has been accused of harboring a sexist environment inside its workplace.
On Wednesday, the website replied to a user’s question asking “for the result of the England-Australia football match today” by stating that there was no match between England and Australia. The user had asked for information about the match.
A spokesperson from Amazon has concluded that the problem was caused by an oversight, which has now been remedied in the company’s systems.
The sphere of activity that encompasses academic labor and intellectual study This was brought to our notice by Joanne Rodda, and she understood it to suggest that it proved that “sexism in football was established in Alexa.” Joanne is the one who brought our attention to this specific problem in the first place.
Dr. Rodda, a senior professor in psychiatry at Kent and Medway Medical School who is interested in artificial intelligence (AI), said that the only time she was able to elicit a reaction from Alexa was when she remarked that she was interested in women’s football. Dr. Rodda is also interested in AI. Dr. Rodda has an interest in artificial intelligence as well. Dr. Rodda is someone who is interested in the field of artificial intelligence.
The following is an excerpt from the statement that she gave to the media: “When I questioned Alexa about the women’s football match that took place today between England and Australia, it told me of the result.”
With the assistance of Alexa, she was able to reproduce what she had found in the past successfully.
After using Alexa for more than a decade, Dr. Rodda told the BBC that it was “very disappointing” that the AI algorithm had just been “tuned” today so that it now recognised woman’s World Cup football as “football.” This was after Dr. Rodda had used Alexa for more than a decade. The “tuning” that took place today brought about this realization, which came about as a consequence of today’s events. This change came about as a result of Dr. Rodda’s remarks to the BBC, in which he described it as “quite depressing.” This was a reaction to Amazon’s claim that the business had researched the problem and taken the required measures to remedy it. Amazon had said that the firm had taken these actions.
Amazon has recognized that a mistake was made as a consequence of an issue with one of its systems, which did not function as intended.
When a user asks Alexa a question, the answer is created using information that has been obtained from a broad variety of sources. These sources include websites, Amazon, and third-party content providers that have the required license. This is what Amazon asserts, and they are the ones who supplied the information in the first place, so they would say this.
It went on to claim that despite the fact that it did have automated systems that used AI to assess the context and gather the most relevant data, the algorithms those systems used had gotten it wrong in this specific case because the context was so complicated.
The firm has said that it has teams who are explicitly charged with assisting to prevent scenarios that are similar to the one that took happened, and the company also stated that it expected that the systems will continue to grow into something that is more advantageous over the course of time. The company also said that it had anticipated for the possibility that the systems might get more advanced over the course of time and that it had assumed that this would be the case.
Dr. Rodda expressed skepticism on the degree to which the issue had been appropriately addressed, adding that she had continued to have problems of a similar kind with the Women’s Super League. She went on to say that she was concerned about the matter. Because of this, she began to have doubts about the extent to which the problem had been successfully handled. In addition to this, she brought up concerns about the degree to which the issue had been resolved in a way that was seen as being acceptable.
After she had finished responding, she went on to claim that after she had gotten her answer, she had asked Alexa, “simply out of curiosity, I simply asked her who the Arsenal football club will be playing against in October.”
It was unable to offer an answer when I specifically requested for the women’s fixtures but instead included information about the men’s team in their response. “It was unable to deliver an answer when I requested explicitly for the women’s fixtures,” the computer said in response to my question.
This event sheds light on a problem known as implicit bias, which has been increasing prominence since the area of artificial intelligence (AI) has been quickly advancing in recent years.
As a direct result of the rapid advancements that have been made, there are some individuals who are concerned that advances in artificial intelligence might put the future of humanity in jeopardy. Others, such as Margrethe Vestager, the head of competition for the EU, are of the view that the potential for AI to reinforce existent prejudices is a more important reason for alarm than the possibility for AI to develop new biases. This is one of their main points of contention. This is one of the primary disagreements that they have with us.
This is owing to the fact that the quality of the data used to train AI can never be better than the quality of the data itself; this is a constraint of the training process. The developers are responsible for ensuring that the artificial intelligence (AI) systems they construct are “trained” on massive datasets that include a sufficient degree of variance in order to function properly. Nevertheless, there are circumstances in which this is not at all the case at all.
After having biases introduced into it, it is not always easy to make a tool “unlearn” its previous training that it has received. This is due to the fact that the tool had to “learn” such biases in the first place before it could function properly. Sometimes the only option is to begin the process from the very beginning, which is something that businesses may be reluctant to undertake due to the tremendous costs connected with building AI in the first place. However, sometimes the only alternative is to begin the process from the very beginning.
When artificial intelligence technologies begin to dictate not only what we see and hear, but also how much we pay for things like vehicle insurance, and even what kind of medical treatment we require, it is going to become increasingly difficult to shake the feeling that we are being ignored by a computer program. This is something that is going to get even more difficult to do in the future. This feeling is likely to get much more unbearable as more time passes.
