A starting point for discussion
The idea
The author reports Zarsky’s argument that people in a privileged majority may prefer human-run profiling because human bias could favor them over minorities. Danaher says he does not endorse Zarsky’s argument.
Place in the reasoning
AI assessment · Connected to reasoning
Reports Zarsky’s explanation for some preference for human profiling and explicitly says Danaher does not endorse it.
Adapting to computer systems or resisting them can both carry risks
Adds an attributed, non-endorsed account of a possible motivation for resistance; it does not establish that motivation as true.
What this means and why it matters
What this means
Zarsky suggests that people who benefit from human bias may prefer decision processes that leave room for it. Danaher reports this explanation but does not agree with it.
Why it matters
The argument raises the possibility that opposition to automated systems can reflect whose interests a decision process serves. But the passage does not show that this explains opposition in general.
Conditions & assumptions
Source coverage: The full text of the research paper written by the author, read from a copy hosted on another site; not the final version formatted by the publisher. This is a position attributed to Zarsky, and the author explicitly distances himself from endorsing it.
Questions this connects to
AI-suggested relationships. Authors have not necessarily responded to one another.
How strong is this claim?
AI assessment · not a probability or a final resolution
The passage clearly attributes this argument and clearly states the author’s distance from it.