April 18, 2017
Sir, John Thornhill writes: “Mireille Hildebrandt, professor of law and technology at the Free University of Brussels, says one of the dangers of AI is that we become overly reliant on “mindless minds” that we do not fully comprehend. She argues that the purpose and effect of these algorithms must therefore be testable and contestable in a courtroom. “If you cannot meaningfully explain your system’s decisions then you cannot make them,” she says.” “Only human intelligence can solve the AI challenge” April 18.
Indeed, but that should go for humans too! For instance bank regulators should be hauled in front of a courtroom, in order to answer some very basic questions about their risk weighted capital requirements for banks.
I ask this because I am absolutely sure that, if AI regulated our banks, then at least the following two questions would have been asked:
What is the purpose of banks? And something like John A Shedd’s “A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are for” would have been considered.
What causes big bank crises? And something like Voltaire’s “May God defend me from my friends, I can defend myself from my enemies” would have been considered.
As a consequence we would not be having our banks being regulated to avoid the risk taking the future of our grandchildren need, for no real bank stability purpose at all.
Here follows some of the questions that I would like to ask the current bank regulators in front of a court, since they do not even acknowledge hearing these.