USENIX Security '18-Q: Why Do Keynote Speakers Keep Suggesting That Improving Security Is Possible?

James Micken's talk from almost a decade ago now covers this stuff perfectly... ▶ this video I re-watch it fairly often, and we just keep getting worse.

> ML models is most often inscrutable, with the consequence that decisions taken by ML models cannot be fathomed by human decision makers Yup, James Mickens planted this seed 6 years ago, well worth the watch, even if you already agree it's brilliant cathartic humour (the subject isn't really "security"). ▶ this video

Nearly all talks by James Mickens are a laugh a minute. The guy is the only computer science standup comedian I have ever encountered. He is also technically excellent. This one is a classic: ▶ this video

I've always been a fan of his talks. His keynote at USENIX Security 2018 is by far the best summation of the dangers of ML that I've ever seen. It's hilarious too. ▶ this video

The actual video referenced is a hoot[1] A cautionary tale about AI, Technological Manifest Destiny, IoT, and why you shouldn't trust it, ever. His take down of IoT devices is hilarious. [1] ▶ this video

I believe this talk [0] by James Mickens is very applicable. He touches on trusting neural nets with decisions that have real-world consequences. It is insightful and hilarious but also terrifying. ▶ this video "Why do keynote speakers keep suggesting that improving security is possible?"

I generally dislike consuming computer content in video form, but there is plenty of interesting content out there. Lots of conferences video tape sessions. Plenty of noise but some good things too. E.g. one of my faves: ▶ this video

"What matters now is impact, not intent." James Mickens, using logic and humor, makes this point in a way that even geeks might understand. "Why Do Keynote Speakers Keep Suggesting That Improving Security Is Possible?" ▶ this video

I think James Mickens (Harvard CS) has it right. ML is inscrutable, black-magic that no one really understands. This is long, but worth watching: ▶ this video

You might be interested in this keynote by James Mickens: ▶ this video titled “Why Do Keynote Speakers Keep Suggesting That Improving Security Is Possible?”.

Reading this article, I kept think about James Micken's 2018 usenix security talk ▶ this video . He warns quite effectively against widely deploying technology that we don't understand. Kevin Scott, on the other hand, seems to have exactly the opposite take. I suppose there is a reason though why one of them is a successful businessman and the other is an academic.

> If it doesn't work as I expect it so it should be banned. Well yes that's a very reasonable expectation. In most fields, when you sell something that doesn't work, it's called fraud. But in fields where it actually matter for safety, regulations are most stringent, such as in mechanics or medicine. If a car had 1% chance of blowing up killing everyone inside, would it be legal to sell it? Why is it ok for OpenAI to sell a chatbot that has 1% chance to convince you of utter bullshit when you ask it a serious question? I believe education and communication to be critical to society's wellbeing, so i would hold companies in this field to greater standards. > Also NLP can be used to protect vulnerable groups from online abuse. Automated filters do not understand sarcasm, quotation, criticism... Sure that avoids the scunthorpe problem, but for example, auto-moderation bots trying to prevent racist abuse often censor black people calling one another the n word, which is completely ok. Nothing can replace moderation. > It helps people find related content (which they enjoy). Maybe, but i doubt it. I've yet to see advertisement/recommendations for content i actually enjoy, or to meet people who have such experiences. I've only ever heard that from advertisers, but maybe you have better experience than i do? > Don't blame technology for the bad actions of companies. Their intentions would have corrupted whatever technology is available. Good point! But technology that makes it easie