4 ms·
> First, that I'd have to manually scan through all the articles anyway, just in case the classifier made a mistake and maybe dumped an article I found intensel
by crznp 9y ago
> First, that I'd have to manually scan through all the articles anyway, just in case the classifier made a mistake and maybe dumped an article I found intensely interesting in the uninteresting pile.
But I'm sure there are interesting articles that didn't get classified at all. It doesn't seem like the end of the world if you lose a little wheat with the chaff.
> overall what I found interesting or not changed from day to day
This seems like the problem. If you rated an article highly yesterday, it doesn't mean you want to read the same article again today. "Interesting" largely means "novel" and it is hard to find that by looking at similarities to what was new in the past.
- pmoriarty 9y ago"It doesn't seem like the end of the world if you lose a little wheat with the chaff." But is it losing a little or a lot? No way to tell without looking. Even if it misses just a little, that little bit might have been crucial. If it misclassifies "NYC NUKED!!!" as uninteresting that's a single mistake that could make me oblivious to a hugely consequential event. Of course, as a human classifier, I'll doubtlessly making my own mistakes, and maybe the AI classifier could help me out by pre-classifying articles for me, but it could also be misleading and will cost me in terms of spending time on training and maintenance. I'm not really sure what the right solution is here.
- PaulHoule 9y agoIf NYC got nuked, I'd probably hear about it some other way.