5 ms·

> I'm pretty sure no one is seriously remotely claiming that machines understand text better than humans. Just some of the headlines: - http://money.cnn.com/2

> I'm pretty sure no one is seriously remotely claiming that machines understand text better than humans. Just some of the headlines: - http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/15/technology/reading-robot-alibaba-microsoft-stanford/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/15/technology/reading-robot-ali... "Computers are getting better than humans at reading" - http://fortune.com/2018/01/15/artificial-intelligence-ai-china-alibaba-reading-comprehension-stanford/ http://fortune.com/2018/01/15/artificial-intelligence-ai-chi... "Computer AI Can Now Read Better Than You Do" - https://gizmodo.com/ai-used-to-sell-you-more-stuff-can-now-read-better-than-1822117189 https://gizmodo.com/ai-used-to-sell-you-more-stuff-can-now-r... "The AI Used to Sell You More Stuff Can Now Read Better Than a Human"

make3 9y ago
I meant the scientists, not the tech journalists. Clearly tech "journalists" is a very loose term nowadays
- nkoren 9y ago
  Yes, but the source article is clearly addressing the general public, not scientists. And it's doing a much better job of representing the state of technology than other sources that are addressed to the general public. So not sure what your complaint is.
  - make3 9y ago
    my complaint is that the verge is one of the journals the more guilty of overhyping ai stuff there is, that it's one of the hardest cases of the pot calling the kettle black I've seen
- imh 9y ago
  Microsoft's own blogpost sure doesn't help (https://blogs.microsoft.com/ai/microsoft-creates-ai-can-read-document-answer-questions-well-person/ https://blogs.microsoft.com/ai/microsoft-creates-ai-can-read...) >Microsoft creates AI that can read a document and answer questions about it as well as a person
- romaniv 9y ago
  Scientists often carefully construct tasks, evaluation criteria and even test sets to make AI seem better than humans or at least better than it really is.

make3 9y ago

I meant the scientists, not the tech journalists. Clearly tech "journalists" is a very loose term nowadays

nkoren 9y ago
Yes, but the source article is clearly addressing the general public, not scientists. And it's doing a much better job of representing the state of technology than other sources that are addressed to the general public. So not sure what your complaint is.
- make3 9y ago
  my complaint is that the verge is one of the journals the more guilty of overhyping ai stuff there is, that it's one of the hardest cases of the pot calling the kettle black I've seen
imh 9y ago
Microsoft's own blogpost sure doesn't help (https://blogs.microsoft.com/ai/microsoft-creates-ai-can-read-document-answer-questions-well-person/ https://blogs.microsoft.com/ai/microsoft-creates-ai-can-read...) >Microsoft creates AI that can read a document and answer questions about it as well as a person
romaniv 9y ago
Scientists often carefully construct tasks, evaluation criteria and even test sets to make AI seem better than humans or at least better than it really is.