|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United States43582 Posts
On August 16 2016 03:45 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 03:25 RoomOfMush wrote:
I personally believe that if you want high quality unbiased news they must not be monetized. No lobbyists, no advertisements, no donations, no trying to maximize numbers or shares or anything.
Of course, that doesnt work very well in real life. People need to be paid, they wont work for free. The only viable solution is the state paying for the news but then how can they be unbiased?
Perhaps if free unbiased news were declared a basic right which the state has to provide and the current government and law-makers have no chance of changing its rules easily. But thats very likely to ever happen now, is it? This is more or less the BBC? But then as you identify your never going to be unbiased, someone is always footing the bill and that person will always have an agenda they try to push, even if subconsciously. What we need is an AI news network that can operate completely independently and without opinion, based purely on facts.
What happens when it starts stating news you don't like
"New study shows race mixing erodes hundreds of thousands of years of beneficial genetic mutations, more at 7"
"Was Hitler right? This new study says maybe!"
"Do your friends like you? This most recent survey says no"
I think we'd all get very angry at AI news very quickly.
|
It'd certainly be possible in principle to make something publicly funded in the US that would work decently; but there's not the political will for it. The stuff we have already gets a lot of attacks from the Republicans.
|
On August 16 2016 03:53 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 03:45 Gorsameth wrote:On August 16 2016 03:25 RoomOfMush wrote:
I personally believe that if you want high quality unbiased news they must not be monetized. No lobbyists, no advertisements, no donations, no trying to maximize numbers or shares or anything.
Of course, that doesnt work very well in real life. People need to be paid, they wont work for free. The only viable solution is the state paying for the news but then how can they be unbiased?
Perhaps if free unbiased news were declared a basic right which the state has to provide and the current government and law-makers have no chance of changing its rules easily. But thats very likely to ever happen now, is it? This is more or less the BBC? But then as you identify your never going to be unbiased, someone is always footing the bill and that person will always have an agenda they try to push, even if subconsciously. What we need is an AI news network that can operate completely independently and without opinion, based purely on facts. What happens when it starts stating news you don't like "New study shows race mixing erodes hundreds of thousands of years of beneficial genetic mutations, more at 7" "Was Hitler right? This new study says maybe!" "Do your friends like you? This most recent survey says no" I think we'd all get very angry at AI news very quickly.
Relevant news article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/03/24/microsofts-teen-girl-ai-turns-into-a-hitler-loving-sex-robot-wit/
Plus, whoever creates this robot would need a "fact" filter. And thus bias is introduced.
|
Given how hard it is to actually determine what is "fact" we're a long way from getting an ai to do it.
|
The tech industries obsession with using software to solve issues like bias, picking what we want to watch and other human decisions will slowly reaching its limit. An AI can’t built trust and people look for that.
|
2001: never forget
2016: ????????
|
On August 16 2016 04:34 Plansix wrote:
The tech industries obsession with using software to solve issues like bias, picking what we want to watch and other human decisions will slowly reaching its limit. An AI can’t built trust and people look for that.
How can an AI not build trust?
Any entity, being human or artificial that is often correct in its assessment/reporting/calculation will build trust in those assessments/reports/calculations being correct.
|
Its pretty much impossible to do (good) news with artificial intelligence. For a computer this is a task which can only be managed with the help of statistics and heuristics. Both of which can easily be manipulated by anybody who knows the algorithms behind it.
|
Don't you know that 9/11 happened after Obama became president!
/facepalm
|
On August 16 2016 04:38 RoomOfMush wrote:
Its pretty much impossible to do (good) news with artificial intelligence. For a computer this is a task which can only be managed with the help of statistics and heuristics. Both of which can easily be manipulated by anybody who knows the algorithms behind it.
And how would it not be able to check that proper procedure was followed? Or discard those that do not provide adequate documentation of said procedure?
|
On August 16 2016 04:37 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 04:34 Plansix wrote:
The tech industries obsession with using software to solve issues like bias, picking what we want to watch and other human decisions will slowly reaching its limit. An AI can’t built trust and people look for that. How can an AI not build trust? Any entity, being human or artificial that is often correct in its assessment/reporting/calculation will build trust in those assessments/reports/calculations being correct.
How is the public going to trust the News Feed AI when they have no idea how the News Feed AI operates? If it feeds me news, how I do I know it’s not filtering out news about AI filtering news? How do I know it’s the same AI every day?
How does an AI know what bias is?
|
On August 16 2016 04:41 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 04:37 Gorsameth wrote:On August 16 2016 04:34 Plansix wrote:
The tech industries obsession with using software to solve issues like bias, picking what we want to watch and other human decisions will slowly reaching its limit. An AI can’t built trust and people look for that. How can an AI not build trust? Any entity, being human or artificial that is often correct in its assessment/reporting/calculation will build trust in those assessments/reports/calculations being correct. How is the public going to trust the News Feed AI when they have no idea how the News Feed AI operates? If it feeds me news, how I do I know it’s not filtering out news about AI filtering news? How do I know it’s the same AI every day? How does an AI know what bias is?
Do I know how fox or cnn operates? How do I know they are not filtering news?
How do you trust anyone in the world. I do not know if they are purposefully misrepresenting facts.
The point is that humans are biased. Even if we try to avoid being biased our subconscious gets in the way easily. Therefor the only way to create unbiased news is to remove the human factor.
|
On August 16 2016 04:39 Gorsameth wrote:Don't you know that 9/11 happened after Obama became president! /facepalm
Obviously! Obama come to power in 08, and 9 as well as 11 are bigger than 8. So it must have been after him!
|
On August 16 2016 04:39 Gorsameth wrote:Don't you know that 9/11 happened after Obama became president! /facepalm
if I were anyone id have to ask him to elaborate.. he was the NYC mayor on 9/11 and this hurts my heart a little.
|
On August 16 2016 04:50 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 04:39 Gorsameth wrote:Don't you know that 9/11 happened after Obama became president! /facepalm if I were anyone id have to ask him to elaborate.. he was the NYC mayor on 9/11 and this hurts my heart a little.
Wow, didnt even know that...
To make such a bold faced lie when you can name 100's of different things to get the same point across without lying...
Faith in Humanity -1.
|
On August 16 2016 04:44 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 04:41 Plansix wrote:On August 16 2016 04:37 Gorsameth wrote:On August 16 2016 04:34 Plansix wrote:
The tech industries obsession with using software to solve issues like bias, picking what we want to watch and other human decisions will slowly reaching its limit. An AI can’t built trust and people look for that. How can an AI not build trust? Any entity, being human or artificial that is often correct in its assessment/reporting/calculation will build trust in those assessments/reports/calculations being correct. How is the public going to trust the News Feed AI when they have no idea how the News Feed AI operates? If it feeds me news, how I do I know it’s not filtering out news about AI filtering news? How do I know it’s the same AI every day? How does an AI know what bias is? Do I know how fox or cnn operates? How do I know they are not filtering news? How do you trust anyone in the world. I do not know if they are purposefully misrepresenting facts. The point is that humans are biased. Even if we try to avoid being biased our subconscious gets in the way easily. Therefor the only way to create unbiased news is to remove the human factor.
Humans are more transparent that AI. I can look up where they were educated. I can look up their writings and any public talks they gave. I can review interviews. They can build up trust over time.
An AI can be rewritten in a day.
Bias cannot be removed from news. The only thing you can hope for is to trust the humans brining you the news and that they are trying to keep you informed.
|
On August 16 2016 04:53 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 04:50 brian wrote:On August 16 2016 04:39 Gorsameth wrote:Don't you know that 9/11 happened after Obama became president! /facepalm if I were anyone id have to ask him to elaborate.. he was the NYC mayor on 9/11 and this hurts my heart a little. Wow, didnt even know that... To make such a bold faced lie when you can name 100's of different things to get the same point across without lying... Faith in Humanity -1.
Giuliani has fallen so far. Actually, maybe not so far. This reddit post sheds a little light on the kind of guy he is.
My only question is will Trump say something even dumber today?
|
And Trump just proposed a “ideological test for all Muslims” which I am pretty sure isn’t allowed. Pretty sure you are not allowed to just pick a religion and go “All people of that religion have to take this test.”
|
He's basically denying that 9/11 was a terrorist attack... even though he was literally the mayor of NYC at the time. Sigh.
|
On August 16 2016 04:40 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 04:38 RoomOfMush wrote:
Its pretty much impossible to do (good) news with artificial intelligence. For a computer this is a task which can only be managed with the help of statistics and heuristics. Both of which can easily be manipulated by anybody who knows the algorithms behind it. And how would it not be able to check that proper procedure was followed? Or discard those that do not provide adequate documentation of said procedure?
Because thats how computers work. The computer can only do the things you teach it to do. If the human programmer does not know how to check pieces of news for proper procedure then its impossible for the AI to do it too. And the AI can not use gut feeling. You have to define a step-by-step guide of atomic actions to take to determine whether a piece of news is trustworthy, correct, relevant, etc to teach your news-AI how to work.
I dont know how you could evaluate all news in such a way but if you know it then please explain it to me.
On August 16 2016 04:55 Plansix wrote:
An AI can be rewritten in a day.
An AI can certainly not be written in a day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
