4 ms·

> "The opinion is split as to whether or not it’s a real AI, and there seems to be no way of proving its nature on way or the other." Clearly, the author didn'

> "The opinion is split as to whether or not it’s a real AI, and there seems to be no way of proving its nature on way or the other." Clearly, the author didn't even do the most basic fact checking. Since, Facebook clearly told everyone that M was going to be AI that was assisted by humans. It's literally in the announcement post: https://www.facebook.com/Davemarcus/posts/10156070660595195 https://www.facebook.com/Davemarcus/posts/10156070660595195 > "It's powered by artificial intelligence that's trained and supervised by people."

icebraining 11y ago
But that's exactly the point: is it AI trained by people, or people aided by AI tools? It's not the same.
- ikeboy 11y ago
  See http://www.wired.com/2015/08/how-facebook-m-works/ http://www.wired.com/2015/08/how-facebook-m-works/
  - acqq 11y ago
    Yes, the article is explicit: "For more complicated tasks, such as making a driving test appointment at the DMV, the humans will do most of the heavy lifting. They’ll actually place a call to the DMV."
- azernik 11y ago
  I think there's a large space where the two are indeed the same.
- tonylucas 11y ago
  I think that also depends on who is actually completing/fulfilling the task, in the DMV example its AI adding context to a task that can't be automated easily. The AI can still do the requirements/information gathering and leaving the job for a person to do. For common issues (support triage, customer service issues) even this still has significant value. Equally from a training point of view, it may simply be the person correcting/confirming the AI is right, and leaving it to get on with the process, rather than fallover to the human completely.
bad_user 11y ago
You know how to read, great for you. But that doesn't say much, as all AI that was ever attempted was trained and supervised by people. Plus this was blackbox testing and I found it to be an interested read nonetheless.
- mrdrozdov 11y ago
  That's simply not true. There is such thing as unsupervised learning in AI.
- dang 11y ago
  > You know how to read, great for you. Please don't be uncivil on Hacker News. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

icebraining 11y ago

But that's exactly the point: is it AI trained by people, or people aided by AI tools? It's not the same.

ikeboy 11y ago
See http://www.wired.com/2015/08/how-facebook-m-works/ http://www.wired.com/2015/08/how-facebook-m-works/
- acqq 11y ago
  Yes, the article is explicit: "For more complicated tasks, such as making a driving test appointment at the DMV, the humans will do most of the heavy lifting. They’ll actually place a call to the DMV."
azernik 11y ago
I think there's a large space where the two are indeed the same.
tonylucas 11y ago
I think that also depends on who is actually completing/fulfilling the task, in the DMV example its AI adding context to a task that can't be automated easily. The AI can still do the requirements/information gathering and leaving the job for a person to do. For common issues (support triage, customer service issues) even this still has significant value. Equally from a training point of view, it may simply be the person correcting/confirming the AI is right, and leaving it to get on with the process, rather than fallover to the human completely.

bad_user 11y ago

You know how to read, great for you. But that doesn't say much, as all AI that was ever attempted was trained and supervised by people. Plus this was blackbox testing and I found it to be an interested read nonetheless.

mrdrozdov 11y ago
That's simply not true. There is such thing as unsupervised learning in AI.
dang 11y ago
> You know how to read, great for you. Please don't be uncivil on Hacker News. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html