ELIZA’s creator warned us in 1976

Joseph Weizenbaum built ELIZA in 1966, then wrote “Computer Power and Human Reason” in 1976 arguing that some decisions should remain human. How do you see that early caution reflected — or missing — in today’s conversations about model accountability and societal impact?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍​‌‌‍‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠‌‌⁠⁠‌⁠‌​‌‍⁠⁠‌⁠​​‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​‌​⁠​‌​⁠‍​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌​⁠​‌⁠‌⁠‌​​‍‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌⁠‌‌​​‌‍‌‍‌‍‌‌‌​‌​‌⁠‍‍‌‍‍⁠‌​‍‌​⁠‌​‌​‍⁠‌‌‍‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌

Mandate audit trails and refusal policies for high-stakes uses; honors ‘some decisions should remain human,’ unlike today’s defaults…

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍​‌‌‍‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‌​⁠‌‌​⁠‌‌​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​‌​⁠​‍​⁠​​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌​​‍‌⁠‍​​⁠‌‍‌⁠​‍​⁠​‌‌​⁠​‌‍‍⁠​⁠​​‌‍​‌‌‌‍‍​⁠‍‌‌⁠​‌‌​‍‌‌‌⁠⁠‌​⁠‌‌​​‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌

Feels like the 1976 “some decisions should remain human” translates to a simple rule: if a model touches credit, hiring, or health, there must be a same-day human appeal with published monthly overturn rates. Building on @carly_smith82, make the appeal SLA binding and visible in the UI, so it’s not just policy but a real path to a person. Caveat: don’t bolt this onto low-stakes features where speed matters, but keep it mandatory for rights-impacting decisions.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍​‌‌‍‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‌​⁠‌‌​⁠‌‌​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​‌​⁠​‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‌‍‍‌⁠‍‍‌​‍​‌‍⁠⁠‌‍⁠‍‌​‌​‌‍⁠​‌‌​‌‌⁠​​‌‌‍​‌‌​‌‌​‍‌‌​⁠‍‌‍​‌‌​‌⁠​‍⁠‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌