Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Models for understanding and holding systems accountable have long rested upon ideals and logics of transparency. Being able to see a system is sometimes equated with being able to know how it works and govern it—a pattern that recurs in recent work about transparency and computational systems. But can “black boxes’ ever be opened, and if so, would that ever be sufficient? In this article, we critically interrogate the ideal of transparency, trace some of its roots in scientific and sociotechnical epistemological cultures, and present 10 limitations to its application. We specifically focus on the inadequacy of transparency for understanding and governing algorithmic systems and sketch an alternative typology of algorithmic accountability grounded in constructive engagements with the limitations of transparency ideals.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ananny et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69d6bb258dca315383ed8b23 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816676645
Mike Ananny
Kate Crawford
New Media & Society
New York University
University of Southern California
Microsoft (United States)
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...