I agree, but cmiles74 has a bit of a point, too. Everyone short of the KKK (and maybe even them) will claim that their intent is pure. Lacking a foolproof way to judge others' hearts, all we have to go on is actions and their effects.
As I said, I agree with you. But our position can lead to hiding some genuine racism under the "unintentional" disguise. It also leaves unintentional systematic biases unaddressed. While those may not exist as often as the left claims, they do at least sometimes exist, and do need to be addressed.
I don't disagree. But I don't think we can judge the intent of people who are discriminating in a racist way, aside from simply asking them what the think their intent might have been. At that point it's very likely we'll be dealing with a rationalization or a half-truth because not only is there a stigma attached to racist behavior but in many cases it is illegal as well and there are other punishments to contend with.
If we need to accurately gauge their intent, that's not really possible. In the case of an algorithm we've divorced the process from the source of intent (the author of the algorithm), there is no intent to evaluate.
Claiming racism is anything but intent is changing the definition of racism. Which is:
"prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."
If you start changing the definition of words to suit a political goal, only the people who already agree with you will listen.