--- title: 'A bug not a feature, ok boomer' url: 'https://rethunk.englishup.me/okboomer' markdown: 'https://rethunk.englishup.me/okboomer.md' date: '2026-10-30' description: 'A bug not a feature, ok boomer So this is going to be a hate read of Donald Clark''s Why is ‘AI and Ethics’ work mostly a waste of time? Clark sets out his qualifications for talking about this issue: "I run an AI company, have invested in AI companies, taught the application of AI in my field, giv…' --- # A bug not a feature, ok boomer So this is going to be a hate read of Donald Clark's [Why is ‘AI and Ethics’ work mostly a waste of time?](http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/2021/03/why-is-ai-and-ethics-work-mostly-waste.html) Clark sets out his qualifications for talking about this issue: > "I run an AI company, have invested in AI companies, taught the application of AI in my field, give talks and podcasts on the subject and have written a book on the subject." Well thanks for that info I guess, so you have some skin in the game? In the next paragraph titled *"Actual ethics"* he claims: > "There is little in the way of actual ethics among those in this field. Questions about what moral philosophy is being brought to the table is met with blank stares." This is very limited view of ethics, that workers, who may not cite philosophy of ethics, are labouring in a field *"rife with amateurism"* which instead cites sociological and historical aspects of ethics in AI. I wonder if the author Dyal-Chand (2021), of AutoCorrecting for Whiteness, which argues for better design in auto-correct technology based on property law, consumer law and culture, will be disappointed to hear they are an amateur because no citation of Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Kant, Bentham and Mill is to be found in their paper? He then declares: > "Many so-called ethical issues are simply design issues...My Alexa voice recognition struggled with my Scottish accent at first, it no longer does. We must not confuse ethics with design." The above captures a trope in technologists responses to system failures - it is a bug not a feature. We can improve it, no worries. But yes worries. Alexa no longer has problems with Clark's Scottish accent because voice recognition companies prioritise profitable demographics as collecting training data for voice recognition is expensive and time consuming. Smaller, marginalised demographics will just have to put up with such design decisions by for example speaking to such systems in a slow pausing voice, much like one might talk to a particularly clueless child. So no, ethical issues are not simply design issues. Interesting side note, clear speech strategies can lead AI systems to think the speaker is angry and so may transfer a call to a live customer service person (Lawrence, 2021). In the paragraph *"Leave it to the experts"* it would be handy to know if the comment *"every man, woman, uncle auntie and their dog on the case"* refers to a charge that the work of ethics in AI is being done by unqualified people or that Clark is merely being annoyed by general public questions? Bringing in worldwide deaths from cars to compare it to a famous case of hand sanitiser not recognising dark skins is some desperate leap. Mind you this extreme what aboutism may be worth thinking about, i.e. what about other things I could be doing rather than hate reading this Donald Clark guff? The main point Clark seems concerned about is a claim that: > "The atmosphere in some areas of academe are so extreme that it is putting a brake on good research and outcomes in health and many other areas of human endeavour". This sounds hyperbolic especially combined with his claim in an earlier paragraph that *"objectivity"* in universities is being displaced by *"activism"*. What I speculate is that his commercial interests, which he states in his opening, is being frustrated by concerns on ethics that he seems to see as being dominant especially in academia. Certainly throwing around big dismissive claims could be one response to these ethical concerns, or there could be more thoughtful responses such as detailed in the case study of an artificial voice company called Modulate by Gordan & Budish (2021). If you are interested you can try your hand at some more technologist responses to system failures, what Mullaney (2021) calls [**"assuring words ready to defuse or deflect"**](https://interact.englishup.me/assuring-words/). # References Dyal-Chand, R. (2021). [*Autocorrecting for Whiteness*.](http://www.bu.edu/bulawreview/files/2021/03/DYAL-CHAND.pdf) Gordon, R., & Budish, R. (2021). [*Skin in the Game: Modulate AI and Addressing the Legal and Ethical Challenges of Voice Skin Technology*.](https://cyber.harvard.edu/publication/2020/modulate-case-study/) Lawrence, H. M. (2021). *Siri Disciplines*. In Mullaney, T. S., Peters, B., Hicks, M., and Philip, K. (Eds). Your Computer is on Fire. MIT Press. Mullaney, T. S. (2021). *Your Computer Is on Fire*. In Mullaney, T. S., Peters, B., Hicks, M., and Philip, K. (Eds). Your Computer is on Fire. MIT Press. --- ## Navigation - Previous: [Changing names](https://rethunk.englishup.me/names.md) - Next: [Post humanist nods](https://rethunk.englishup.me/post-humanism.md)