Replied in thread
"#Amsterdam followed every piece of advice in the #ResponsibleAI playbook. It debiased its system when early tests showed ethnic #bias and brought on academics and consultants to shape its approach, ultimately choosing an explainable algorithm over more opaque alternatives. The city even consulted a participatory council of welfare recipients.
[Yet] the system continued to be plagued by biases.
[…] As political pressure mounted, officials killed the project."
https://www.lighthousereports.com/investigation/the-limits-of-ethical-ai/
Lighthouse ReportsThe Limits of Ethical AIUnprecedented access to high-stakes algorithmic experiment tests promise of Ethical AI
Hacker News 
![There is a clear linear trend from AI-AI teaming to Human-Human teaming in moral approval of a passive euthanasia decision (2a: B = 0.59, 95 % CI: [0.39, 0.80], F(1,282) = 32.27, p < .001; 2b:B = 0.75, 95 % CI: [0.51, 0.98], F(1,403) = 38.55, p < .001). In Study 2b, there is a clear drop between the condition where the recommender and the decision-maker are both people, compared to the other two conditions. Jittered gray data points are individual observations; larger blue points are group-wise means. Error bars are 95 % CIs.](https://nerdculture.de/system/media_attachments/files/114/613/294/344/898/550/original/c0f64b4c1261aead.png "There is a clear linear trend from AI-AI teaming to Human-Human teaming in moral approval of a passive euthanasia decision (2a: B = 0.59, 95 % CI: [0.39, 0.80], F(1,282) = 32.27, p < .001; 2b:B = 0.75, 95 % CI: [0.51, 0.98], F(1,403) = 38.55, p < .001). In Study 2b, there is a clear drop between the condition where the recommender and the decision-maker are both people, compared to the other two conditions. Jittered gray data points are individual observations; larger blue points are group-wise means. Error bars are 95 % CIs.")
