Importance of Fair AI for Society

Explore top LinkedIn content from expert professionals.

Summary

Fair AI refers to the development and use of artificial intelligence systems that are unbiased, equitable, and designed to promote societal well-being. Ensuring the fairness of AI is critical to preventing harm, reducing systemic inequalities, and building societal trust in technology.

  • Focus on data quality: Address potential biases in datasets before training AI models to avoid perpetuating systemic inequalities in their outcomes.
  • Emphasize transparency: Ensure AI systems are explainable by making their decision-making processes clear and understandable to all stakeholders.
  • Incorporate societal impact metrics: Develop tools to measure the broader impacts of AI on equity, sustainability, and public trust to ensure technology truly serves humanity.
Summarized by AI based on LinkedIn member posts
  • View profile for Aishwarya Srinivasan
    Aishwarya Srinivasan Aishwarya Srinivasan is an Influencer
    599,000 followers

    I wasn’t actively looking for this book, but it found me at just the right time. Fairness and Machine Learning: Limitations and Opportunities by Solon Barocas, @Moritz Hardt, and Arvind Narayanan is one of those rare books that forces you to pause and rethink everything about AI fairness. It doesn’t just outline the problem—it dives deep into why fairness in AI is so complex and how we can approach it in a more meaningful way. A few things that hit home for me: →Fairness isn’t just a technical problem; it’s a societal one. You can tweak a model all you want, but if the data reflects systemic inequalities, the results will too. → There’s a dangerous overreliance on statistical fixes. Just because a model achieves “parity” doesn’t mean it’s truly fair. Metrics alone can’t solve fairness. → Causality matters. AI models learn correlations, not truths, and that distinction makes all the difference in high-stakes decisions. → The legal system isn’t ready for AI-driven discrimination. The book explores how U.S. anti-discrimination laws fail to address algorithmic decision-making and why fairness cannot be purely a legal compliance exercise. So, how do we fix this? The book doesn’t offer one-size-fits-all solutions (because there aren’t any), but it does provide a roadmap: → Intervene at the data level, not just the model. Bias starts long before a model is trained—rethinking data collection and representation is crucial. → Move beyond statistical fairness metrics. The book highlights the limitations of simplistic fairness measures and advocates for context-specific fairness definitions. → Embed fairness in the entire ML pipeline. Instead of retrofitting fairness after deployment, it should be considered at every stage—from problem definition to evaluation. → Leverage causality, not just correlation. Understanding the why behind patterns in data is key to designing fairer models. → Rethink automation itself. Sometimes, the right answer isn’t a “fairer” algorithm—it’s questioning whether an automated system should be making a decision at all. Who should read this? 📌 AI practitioners who want to build responsible models 📌 Policymakers working on AI regulations 📌 Ethicists thinking beyond just numbers and metrics 📌 Anyone who’s ever asked, Is this AI system actually fair? This book challenges the idea that fairness can be reduced to an optimization problem and forces us to confront the uncomfortable reality that maybe some decisions shouldn’t be automated at all. Would love to hear your thoughts—have you read it? Or do you have other must-reads on AI fairness? 👇 ↧↧↧↧↧↧↧ Share this with your network ♻️ Follow me (Aishwarya Srinivasan) for no-BS AI news, insights, and educational content!

  • Despite all the talks... I don’t think AI is being built ethically - or at least not ethically enough! Last week, I had lunch in San Francisco with my ex-Salesforce colleague and friend Paula Goldman, who taught me everything I know about the matter. When it comes to Enterprise AI, Paula not only focuses on what's possible - she spells out also what's responsible, making sure the latter always wins ! Here's what Paula taught me over time: 👉AI needs guardrails, not just guidelines. 👉Humans must remain at the center — not sidelined by automation. 👉Governance isn’t bureaucracy—it’s the backbone of trust. 👉Transparency isn’t a buzzword—it’s a design principle. 👉And ultimately, AI should serve human well-being, not just shareholder return The choices we make today will shape AI’s impact on society tomorrow. So we need to ensure we design AI to be just, humane, and to truly serves people. How do we do that? 1. Eliminate bias and model fairness AI can mirror and magnify our societal flaws. Trained on historical data, models can adopt biased patterns, leading to harmful outcomes. Remember Amazon’s now-abandoned hiring algorithm that penalized female applicants? Or the COMPAS system that disproportionately flagged Black individuals as high-risk in sentencing? These are the issues we need to swiftly address and remove. Organisations such as the Algorithmic Justice League - who is driving change, exposing bias and demanding accountability - give me hope. 2. Prioritise privacy We need to remember that data is not just data: behind every dataset is a real person data. Real people with real lives. Techniques like federated learning and differential privacy show we can innovate without compromising individual rights. This has to be a focal point for us as it’s super important that individuals feel safe when using AI. 3. Enable transparency & accountability When AI decides who gets a loan, a job, or a life-saving diagnosis, we need to understand how it reached that conclusion. Explainable AI is ending that “black box” era. Startups like CalypsoAI stress-test systems, while tools such as AI Fairness 360 evaluate bias before models go live. 4. Last but not least - a topic that has come back repeatedly in my conversation with Paula - ensure trust can be mutual This might sound crazy, but as we develop AI and the technology edges towards AGI, AI needs to be able to trust us just as much as we need to be able to trust AI. Trust us in the sense that what we’re feeding it is just, ethical and unbiased. And not to bleed in our own perspectives, biases and opinions. There’s much work to do, however, there are promising signs. From AI Now Institute’s policy work to Black in AI’s advocacy for inclusion, concrete initiatives are pushing AI in the right direction when it comes to ensuring that it’s ethical. The choices we make now will shape how well AI fairly serves society. What’s your thoughts on the above?

  • View profile for Patrick Sullivan

    VP of Strategy and Innovation at A-LIGN | TEDx Speaker | Forbes Technology Council | AI Ethicist | ISO/IEC JTC1/SC42 Member

    10,336 followers

    ⚠️ Can AI Serve Humanity Without Measuring Societal Impact?⚠️ It's almost impossible to miss how #AI is reshaping our industries, driving innovation, and influencing billions of lives. Yet, as we innovate, a critical question looms: ⁉️ How can we ensure AI serves humanity's best interests if we don't measure its societal impact?⁉️ Most AI governance metrics today focus solely on compliance and while vital, the broader question of societal impact (environmental, ethical, and human consequences of AI) remains largely underexplored. Addressing this gap is essential for building human-centric AI systems, a priority highlighted by frameworks like the OECD.AI's AI Principles and UNESCO’s ethical guidelines. ➡️ The Need for a Societal Impact Index (SII) Organizations adopting #ISO42001-based AIMS already align governance with principles of transparency, fairness, and accountability. But societal impact metrics go beyond operational governance, addressing questions like: 🔸Does the AI exacerbate inequality? 🔸How do AI systems affect mental health or well-being? 🔸What are the environmental trade-offs of large-scale AI deployment? To address, I see the need for a Societal Impact Index (SII) to complement existing compliance frameworks. The SII would help measure AI systems' effects on broader societal outcomes, tying these efforts to recognized standards. ➡️Proposed Framework for Societal Impact Metrics Drawing from OECD, ISO42001, and Hubbard’s measurement philosophy, here are key components of an SII: 1️⃣ Ethical Fairness Metrics Grounded in OECD principles of fairness and non-discrimination: 🔹 Demographic Bias Impact: Tracks how AI systems impact diverse groups, focusing on disparities in outcomes. 🔹Equity Indicators: Evaluates whether AI tools distribute benefits equitably across socioeconomic or geographic boundaries. 2️⃣ Environmental Sustainability Metrics Inspired by UNESCO’s call for sustainable AI: 🔹Energy Use Efficiency: Measures energy consumption per model training iteration. 🔹Carbon Footprint Tracking: Calculates emissions related to AI operations, a key concern as models grow in size and complexity. 3️⃣ Public Trust Indicators Aligned with #ISO42005 principles of stakeholder engagement: 🔹Explainability Index: Rates how well AI decisions can be understood by non-experts. 🔹Trust Surveys: Aggregates user feedback to quantify perceptions of transparency, fairness, and reliability. ➡️Building the Societal Impact Index The SII builds on ISO42001’s management system structure while integrating principles from the OECD. Key steps include: ✅ Define Objectives: Identify measurable societal outcomes ✅ Model the Ecosystem: Map the interactions between AI systems and stakeholders ✅ Prioritize Measurement Uncertainty: Focus on areas where societal impacts are poorly understood or quantified. ✅ Select Metrics: Leverage existing ISO guidance to build relevant KPIs. ✅ Iterate and Validate: Test metrics in real-world applications

Explore categories