|
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 States43203 Posts
On September 13 2017 00:41 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 00:06 Acrofales wrote:On September 12 2017 22:56 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't like to be on the anti-science side but that sounds like complete bullshit. As a scientist in the very field being discussed, I agree with you. Such algorithms are only as good as the datasets they are given, and if I had to guess, I'd say that these datasets were cherry picked. I'd bet money on that a properly random sample would not fare well. Moreover, I can guess gayness with approximately 85% accuracy too: just always say "straight"... This reminds me, the newspaper I work at recently published an article on a program that claimed to be able to tell, from the style of the writing, if two texts were written by the same author. Or to identify if a text whose author is unknown was written by someone otherwise famous using the same method. This idea is less foreign to me, I mean I can accept that you can tell who wrote a text from its style easier than I can accept that you can tell which political side I'm on from my face. But even that program ended up saying that a bit of Shakespeare and a bit of Harry Potter had 95% chance of being written by the same person. A lot of publicity for not a lot of substance.
Didn't the NSA find the real identity of the creator of bitcoin through using writing style analysis?
|
On September 13 2017 00:41 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 00:06 Acrofales wrote:On September 12 2017 22:56 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't like to be on the anti-science side but that sounds like complete bullshit. As a scientist in the very field being discussed, I agree with you. Such algorithms are only as good as the datasets they are given, and if I had to guess, I'd say that these datasets were cherry picked. I'd bet money on that a properly random sample would not fare well. Moreover, I can guess gayness with approximately 85% accuracy too: just always say "straight"... This reminds me, the newspaper I work at recently published an article on a program that claimed to be able to tell, from the style of the writing, if two texts were written by the same author. Or to identify if a text whose author is unknown was written by someone otherwise famous using the same method. This idea is less foreign to me, I mean I can accept that you can tell who wrote a text from its style easier than I can accept that you can tell which political side I'm on from my face. But even that program ended up saying that a bit of Shakespeare and a bit of Harry Potter had 95% chance of being written by the same person. A lot of publicity for not a lot of substance.
Was it something like this?
|
|
|
United States24740 Posts
Alkinator has taught me that a computer, once provided enough data, can read your mind. Give research teams a little more time and computers will be able to pull a million pieces of information from your photo and turn it into a pretty accurate bio.
|
On September 13 2017 00:54 micronesia wrote:
Alkinator has taught me that a computer, once provided enough data, can read your mind. Give research teams a little more time and computers will be able to pull a million pieces of information from your photo and turn it into a pretty accurate bio.
Akinator is honestly a perfect example of how something can look amazing with relatively straightforward methods. In that case it's just that if you ask 50+ questions structured with pointed responses to be able to whittle down the possibilities, you can essentially approximate being able to cut out 50% of all remaining possibilities with each question. It's a decision tree with, I'd wager, some added functionality for developing, over time, an understanding of which answers to a standard set of questions is associated with which character. Not trivial, but not a particularly complex form of AI - just looks super impressive.
|
On September 13 2017 00:54 micronesia wrote:
Alkinator has taught me that a computer, once provided enough data, can read your mind. Give research teams a little more time and computers will be able to pull a million pieces of information from your photo and turn it into a pretty accurate bio.
Magicians have been doing this with only a pair of eyeballs for centuries.
I wouldn't trust them for any official positions either.
|
I question how anyone would build up public trust for a system like that. That is so close to the 1984 nonsense that I doubt anyone would be comfortable using in any official capacity.
|
United States24740 Posts
On September 13 2017 01:06 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 00:54 micronesia wrote:
Alkinator has taught me that a computer, once provided enough data, can read your mind. Give research teams a little more time and computers will be able to pull a million pieces of information from your photo and turn it into a pretty accurate bio. Magicians have been doing this with only a pair of eyeballs for centuries. I wouldn't trust them for any official positions either.
I think magicians have already been overtaken in capability by this infant technology.
To be clear, I am not advocating this, just pointing out that we shouldn't underestimate the potential capabilities of computers as some have done.
|
|
|
On September 13 2017 01:50 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 01:06 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 13 2017 00:54 micronesia wrote:
Alkinator has taught me that a computer, once provided enough data, can read your mind. Give research teams a little more time and computers will be able to pull a million pieces of information from your photo and turn it into a pretty accurate bio. Magicians have been doing this with only a pair of eyeballs for centuries. I wouldn't trust them for any official positions either. I think magicians have already been overtaken in capability by this infant technology. To be clear, I am not advocating this, just pointing out that we shouldn't underestimate the potential capabilities of computers as some have done.
At this point few underestimate the potency of a technology that is and has been having a substantial impact on the whole world. If anything it's occasionally oversold with unrealistic promises.
|
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction.
|
|
|
On September 13 2017 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction.
A cursory view yields a fairly positive view. Don't know or care to research his history though.
|
On September 13 2017 02:04 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction. A cursory view yields a fairly positive view. Don't know or care to research his history though.
He's also co-sponsoring Bernie's healthcare bill. It's funny to see how suddenly everyone wants to ride the Bernie train.
|
On September 13 2017 02:05 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 02:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 13 2017 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction. A cursory view yields a fairly positive view. Don't know or care to research his history though. He's also co-sponsoring Bernie's healthcare bill. It's funny to see how suddenly everyone wants to ride the Bernie train.
The more Hillary talks, the more Democrats see that that faux-pragmatic "centrism" is a loser's game. If Democrats jump off that game it's prudence more than anything else.
|
On September 13 2017 02:05 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 02:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 13 2017 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction. A cursory view yields a fairly positive view. Don't know or care to research his history though. He's also co-sponsoring Bernie's healthcare bill. It's funny to see how suddenly everyone wants to ride the Bernie train.
I'm curious how many people would actually be sponsoring it if it had any sort of chance of passing.
|
On September 13 2017 01:00 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 00:54 micronesia wrote:
Alkinator has taught me that a computer, once provided enough data, can read your mind. Give research teams a little more time and computers will be able to pull a million pieces of information from your photo and turn it into a pretty accurate bio. Akinator is honestly a perfect example of how something can look amazing with relatively straightforward methods. In that case it's just that if you ask 50+ questions structured with pointed responses to be able to whittle down the possibilities, you can essentially approximate being able to cut out 50% of all remaining possibilities with each question. It's a decision tree with, I'd wager, some added functionality for developing, over time, an understanding of which answers to a standard set of questions is associated with which character. Not trivial, but not a particularly complex form of AI - just looks super impressive.
There's that genie bot that can guess what you're thinking based on yes/no answers which has been around forever.
However, given the amount of data out there, there are ways to make useful predictions about individual behavior and characteristics. Insurance companies and advertisers have been doing this sort of things forever, and now they and other entities have more data and more ways to analyze that data.
|
On September 13 2017 02:05 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 02:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 13 2017 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction. A cursory view yields a fairly positive view. Don't know or care to research his history though. He's also co-sponsoring Bernie's healthcare bill. It's funny to see how suddenly everyone wants to ride the Bernie train.
Bernie won in the end, but he now has to make the deal with the rest of the democratic party. This is how minds and politics are changed. Progress does not come in huge leaps, but through a slow grind.
On September 13 2017 02:09 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 02:05 Mohdoo wrote:On September 13 2017 02:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 13 2017 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction. A cursory view yields a fairly positive view. Don't know or care to research his history though. He's also co-sponsoring Bernie's healthcare bill. It's funny to see how suddenly everyone wants to ride the Bernie train. I'm curious how many people would actually be sponsoring it if it had any sort of chance of passing.
It would be the ACA hearings 2.0, but without a super majority. We are a very long way from getting anything like this through the senate.
|
On September 13 2017 02:08 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 02:05 Mohdoo wrote:On September 13 2017 02:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 13 2017 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction. A cursory view yields a fairly positive view. Don't know or care to research his history though. He's also co-sponsoring Bernie's healthcare bill. It's funny to see how suddenly everyone wants to ride the Bernie train. The more Hillary talks, the more Democrats see that that faux-pragmatic "centrism" is a loser's game. If Democrats jump off that game it's prudence more than anything else.
Her book is turning into a goldmine of ridiculous quotes
|
On September 13 2017 02:13 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2017 02:08 LegalLord wrote:On September 13 2017 02:05 Mohdoo wrote:On September 13 2017 02:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 13 2017 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:
What do people think about senator Merkley running for president? He's got a great review from me, but I am curious what others think. He's in Iowa right now, so he definitely seems like he's going that direction. A cursory view yields a fairly positive view. Don't know or care to research his history though. He's also co-sponsoring Bernie's healthcare bill. It's funny to see how suddenly everyone wants to ride the Bernie train. The more Hillary talks, the more Democrats see that that faux-pragmatic "centrism" is a loser's game. If Democrats jump off that game it's prudence more than anything else. Her book is turning into a goldmine of ridiculous quotes https://twitter.com/charliespiering/status/907587984983289861
The book is way more interesting if you just assume she is being 100% honest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
