Motivation

The reason I picked this over the others was because I like connecting technology and software, especially the most recent and cutting edge technology with real life practical applications to positively impact people’s lives
COVID was the perfect opportunity to show it’s abilities off to the world

Thoughts while reading

Data is gold. If the gold is not not clean, it won’t be used by people. It would be less valuable. Same thing with data
“automated discrimination”
- how do you avoid that
  - equal data?
    - in quantity and quality?
We can’t make AI ignore certain data
- so doesn’t that make data cleaning extremely important?
  - This was one eye-opening realization I had while reading the article
so would have things been better if the data was more accessible?
solution:
- centralized data
- more organized
- more quality less quantity?
- can we use AI to clean data or would it still result in biased data

A lot of people disagreed with the article. “Just use better ML”
Canada is diverse, they coulda just used our data (Josh)
WHO should’ve standardized a data format
Data in some countries is owned by individuals (aka Intellectual Property)
Josh disagrees with the discrimination aspect of the article but Alan provided a good point
It’s only getting data from people who have healthcare. So how do you treat people who are not covered (Caleb). Negative feedback loop
Things were rushed, doctors tryna save lives, paperwork and data entry must’ve not been their top priority (Alan)
There are 2 problems with data:
- lack of data retrieval
In theory the solutions sound nice but hard to actually implement in a capitalistic world (Josh). Different countries and companies wanna compete not collaborate for the betterment of society.
- (Areeba): most countries were against collaborating. Even provincial
Automated discrimination:
- Why not use it on these group of people and not the others (Caleb)
- We don’t know what data is given to the models

I’m someone who is generally agreeable so when I read something from a trusted source I don’t really think too much to disagree with what is said. I just believe everything they say. Coming into this discussion, I assumed that we would go through The article and discuss what we learned and realized while reading it. To my surprise, we spent the majority of the discussion talking about what we disagree on.
I’m honestly glad that we did that because it gave me a whole new perspective on the article. But for that reason, despite thinking that I will be talking a lot and sharing my thoughts, I ended up not sharing as much cuz I was too busy taking in these fresh perspectives my
in general in life I try to always be skeptical when reading news or information from trusted sources or friends because in this day and age, everyone is trying to capture your attention no matter the truthiness of what they share but I decided to fully trust everything this article had to say which, in some way, didn’t allow me to get the most info out of the article
- This reminds me of something I learned a few years back: to get the most out of information, whether it’s a book or an article, try to have a dialogue with the author and what they share. Seeing it in that perspective helps with being able to reflect on the given information and extract the most insights from what you consume. I will try to remember that for the next reading+ reflection for this class

There was definitely a discrepancy between how much each person spoke but from what I saw, everyone was actively listening and taking notes.
As someone who used to suffer from social anxiety, I was aiming to be the guy who provided a stage for the people who were not speaking because they can’t get themselves to “interrupt” the discussion.
- but since I wasn’t the “leader” of the discussion from the get go, Caleb took on that task and did a relatively good job at it.
- if no one takes on that role next discussion, I will definitely step up and be the leader and help shy people get their thoughts out