3 ms·

Then what is your point? manigandham literally adressed your concern; basic demographics, likes, and other sources for content are far better for targeting than

Then what is your point? manigandham literally adressed your concern; basic demographics, likes, and other sources for content are far better for targeting than what a picture could potentially contain, and that can be done with closer to 100% accuracy since a computer doesn't have to "guess" what the content of an image is, it already knows this content from the text in a status, or the location metadata associated with a post, or the people you're tagged with. This is incredibly inaccurate when compared with all those sources.

hacker_9 11y ago
Posted images contain far more information that what is posted in text. Scroll through your feed, people upload images then write a header that adds to the scene. It doesn't describe it. There is so so much more information to gain from parsing images, I can't believe you can't see that, and can only assume you aren't thinking this through properly.
- mynameisvlad 11y ago
  No, I am thinking through this properly, you're just being overly paranoid. A computer ML system right now will not be able to, with a high degree of accuracy, know enough about the image to provide targeted advertisements. They even showed samples of descriptions; they're vague and general, not specific. The description might be "two people, outdoors, at beach" while the content could be "Awesome beach day today with my best buddy!" with X tagged in the image, geolocated to "Y beach" (either through your phone/camera's geolocation feature, or the poster specifically tagging a location which is something Facebook encourages), posted at Z time. Which do you honestly believe is going to provide more information for targeting? Hell, even if the content is "It's a beautiful day out!", you'd still have far more information from the metadata (tags, location, time) than the vague description the auto-generator could possibly provide.

hacker_9 11y ago

Posted images contain far more information that what is posted in text. Scroll through your feed, people upload images then write a header that adds to the scene. It doesn't describe it. There is so so much more information to gain from parsing images, I can't believe you can't see that, and can only assume you aren't thinking this through properly.

mynameisvlad 11y ago
No, I am thinking through this properly, you're just being overly paranoid. A computer ML system right now will not be able to, with a high degree of accuracy, know enough about the image to provide targeted advertisements. They even showed samples of descriptions; they're vague and general, not specific. The description might be "two people, outdoors, at beach" while the content could be "Awesome beach day today with my best buddy!" with X tagged in the image, geolocated to "Y beach" (either through your phone/camera's geolocation feature, or the poster specifically tagging a location which is something Facebook encourages), posted at Z time. Which do you honestly believe is going to provide more information for targeting? Hell, even if the content is "It's a beautiful day out!", you'd still have far more information from the metadata (tags, location, time) than the vague description the auto-generator could possibly provide.