5 ms·
No single human says this is ok. There is no human consensus this is ok. This is a form of non-human intelligence taking over.
by jonsen 8y ago
No single human says this is ok. There is no human consensus this is ok. This is a form of non-human intelligence taking over.
- clairity 8y agoit's not an "intelligence" so much as emergent properties of systems. there are fields like system dynamics and macroeconomics that study such things.
- waqf 8y agoYes — but all "intelligence" is an emergent property of systems. And because the system in this instance is not a human brain, it's non-human intelligence.
- ghazak 8y agoIt’s not really intelligence, so much as selection pressure in the direction of high margin. Evolution isn’t “intelligence” either, but still leads to interesting or highly honed solutions to problems.
- istjohn 8y agoIt's certainly not selection pressure. Google's systems did not evolve because similar companies out-competed and reproduced more effeciently than dissimilar companies. The metaphor doesn't work at all.
- ghazak 8y agoYeah, I actually pretty much agree, I was more responding to the point that nobody made a decision for it to be this way, and that is intelligence. I actually think that it was something that was intentially planned for purely margin reasons.
- belltaco 8y agoNo, it's humans at Google deciding that the financial trade off is worth it. The CEO has the power to change it, but think it's an okay state of affairs.
- duxup 8y agoI think Google is aware of this issue and the powers that be clearly are ok with it.
- dabockster 8y agoNo. This is simply lack of communication, both between computers and humans. All it takes is a couple DBs becoming unjoined in a query or someone not telling the full story for information to be lost.