4 ms·
Yeah, I feel like your parent poster is ignoring the implications of the high false positive rate. Like, let's say I had a grammar check. But the grammar chec
by aetherson 8y ago
Yeah, I feel like your parent poster is ignoring the implications of the high false positive rate.
Like, let's say I had a grammar check. But the grammar check was bad. It flags every other sentence as needing a grammar change, anything other than a very simple "subject-verb-object" sentence structure looks wrong to it. For every correct grammar problem it identifies, it finds 20 incorrect grammar problems.
As a result, I turn off the UI for the grammar check.
Then I write a document that has a grammar problem.
It seems stupid to say that this is either a failure of my use of the software, or a UI failure of the software. The problem is that the fucking software doesn't work, specifically that it fails in a way that makes it too "noisy" to use.
And sure, if my job is to catch grammar errors, then it's also my fault. I'm supposed to be backing up the system. But we also know that I won't be perfect and will have failures of attention sometimes. But regardless of that, the grammar checker just didn't work.
And, in this analogy, bad grammar kills people.
- voidmain 8y agoIn this case, as I understand it, they also disabled the emergency braking feature built into the Volvo. Which wouldn't be obviously crazy if they had better, adequately tested emergency braking integrated with the "autonomy" system. But to disable the existing safety feature in favor of their own system, and also disable their own system due to a high false positive rate, seems negligent on the face of it.
- joejerryronnie 8y agoAnd you have to correct the bad grammer in 0.5 seconds.