6 ms·
A.I. Is Learning from Many Humans
- CzarnyZiutek 7y ago...A PRIORI ==> MULTIVERSE ==> UNIVERSE ==> HUMAN ==> AI ==> A POSTERIORI...
- mindgam3 7y agoAlso, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20717961 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20717961
- sp332 7y agoNo conversation there though.
- seibelj 7y agoAI's key innovation has been the proper marketing of outsourced low-wage labor to investors. Still waiting on those self-driving cars, though... weren't they supposed to be taking me to the airport last year?
- what-the-grump 7y agoStop offending the to be blockchain millionaires.
- melling 7y agoYes, we need lots of correctly tagged data. Waymo released a tagged data set for self-driving: https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/21/waymo-releases-a-self-driving-open-data-set-for-free-use-by-the-research-community/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/21/waymo-releases-a-self-driv... The FT article is a little better: https://www.ft.com/content/2eed925a-c3cf-11e9-a8e9-296ca66511c9 https://www.ft.com/content/2eed925a-c3cf-11e9-a8e9-296ca6651... "Its data, collected using cameras and sensors on Waymo vehicles in a variety of environments and road conditions, include 1,000 high-resolution driving scenes that have been “painstakingly labelled” to indicate the presence of 12m objects such as pedestrians, cyclists and signage."
- mlb_hn 7y agoInteresting that FT adds that first bit to copy/paste.
- melling 7y agoUgh. Forgot to remove that. Didn’t see it on my iPhone.
- TaylorAlexander 7y agoUnfortunately the license for Waymo’s dataset is extremely restrictive and makes it hard to use practically without violating the license. Via Reddit user jaxbotme: “I have concerns about the license on this, which I [voiced on twitter](https://twitter.com/johnluu/status/1164227419919642624 https://twitter.com/johnluu/status/1164227419919642624) and got a reply from one of Waymo's comms people. Overall, it's free as in freeware but not free/open the way you might expect a research dataset to be. Not only are you prohibited from redistributing it (not too uncommon, but still limiting), but researchers cannot publish trained models or their weights, partially or in whole, and researchers cannot use the models on a physical car apparently. There are strong guards here to prevent competition, but they also get in the way of researchers and I feel like it's not really honest to call this an 'open dataset'. If anyone has counter examples where this is actually standard practice, let me know. But I was disappointed in this move for a number of reasons. For one, it would literally be illegal for me to provide this data to someone on a metered or slow connection who cannot download the dataset themselves.” https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/cthaba/waymo_open_dataset_sharing_our_selfdriving_data/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/cthaba/way...
- _fullpint 7y agoNot exactly on topic but after skimming the article and then the comments, there seems to be — albeit a very understandable — misunderstanding of what is being done in the field and how the public views and uses terminology. People hear or read the words Machine Learning and assign a HAL like technology to it. It’s definitely hard to explain an idea like SVM, it’s applications, and how it works/what it does without a background in some linear algebra. And then to broach more complicated topics like temporal real time neural networks in computer vision for something like anomaly detection. From my conversations with people because it’s something that isn’t understood there is almost a cognitive dissonance. One of which expects so much now, but at the same time denies the future application space when the conversation becomes more personal. “Why aren’t self driving cars a thing yet...” and then “A machine couldn’t do what I do.” It’s worrying that there will definitely be regulation coming to the field, where the people writing the laws and the people the writers represent have a hard time understanding what they are trying to regulate. Add in the fact that the tech itself is somewhat cheap and will only get less expensive. You only have to look as far as the Deep Fakes fiasco on Reddit. The guy creating fakes of celebrities being superimposed on porn is a self proclaimed amateur and was able to accomplish a quite a bit at home with Keras. Edit: I do want to mention that a lot of the papers I’ve read recently on real time anomaly detection rely on automated labeling and not having human labelers. It’s only important to have human readable labels if a human has to interpret directly.
- andreyk 7y agoSince it's related, a little self-plug here : I've started and have been running the project Skynet Today (https://www.skynettoday.com/ https://www.skynettoday.com/) to try and make present day AI more understandable for non AI researchers. Always could use more help! https://www.skynettoday.com/contribute https://www.skynettoday.com/contribute
- _fullpint 7y agoWhat type of help are you looking for?
- sgt101 7y ago
- ChuckMcM 7y agoI always wondered how an AI would enslave humans to teach it more things :-)
- sigmonsays 7y agonot the future we imagined when robots ruled human beings =P
- Jun8 7y agoTangential: this could have been a better premise for The Matrix, rather than the battery thing. It would make a great story, if it hasn’t been written already. In a sense babies do this, i.e. they are cute and smile to engage parents and other adults so they engage with them, which increases rate of learning.
- Jack000 7y agoabout the battery thing: https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/19817/was-executive-meddling-the-cause-of-humans-as-batteries-in-the-matrix https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/19817/was-executiv... the original idea makes much more sense in the context of the story, it's basically my head-canon now.
- Jun8 7y agoOh boy, Matrix theories do run deep. My favorite is the Matrix in a Matrix theory (https://matrix.fandom.com/wiki/Matrix_in_a_Matrix_theory https://matrix.fandom.com/wiki/Matrix_in_a_Matrix_theory), I really wish they would pursue this in Matrix 4 (just announced). It's matrices all the way up!
- amirhirsch 7y agousing a captcha of course. (I work on hcaptcha.com)
- ChuckMcM 7y agoOMG. I'm beginning to see a plot line developing here, "Honey, why is the computer asking me to call this number and press 1, before it will let me watch a cat video?", "I guess it just wants to know you aren't a robot, pretty clever because a web scraper wouldn't be able to activate a phone."
- asdfman123 7y agoI think the lack of engineers in the US government is becoming a bigger liability every year. Here science is changing the globe at an ever increasing pace and our congresspeople are baffled and confused by the word "encryption."
- whatshisface 7y agoIt is leading to a rapidly growing reliance on lobbyists for information, including "think tanks" which are groups of lobbyists.
- hugey010 7y agoI completely agree. One cannot pass fair laws on topics one doesn't understand. It's even worse if understanding is based on input from a consultant or lobbyist! There aren't many reasons an engineer would want to jump into the political fray besides altruism. It's like choosing to join the largest, most corrupt, bureaucratic, change-averse, and valueless company that ever existed. For lawyers, that probably sounds like a dream come true. My perspective as an engineer: Yes, there are huge important problems I would like to help solve. No, I don't think I'm willing or capable of solving that class of problems in a system like that.
- sharadov 7y agoIncentivize engineers/technologists to join the government, that's what China has been pushing for the past 3 decades. Partner with the FAANG companies, have them sponsor their employees to go on a paid sabbatical wherein they can contribute to technology solutions within government. I know some form of this was happening under Obama.
- opportune 7y agoI would totally be willing to do this, however I fear the actual implementation would be more of the same: - Terrible consultants, middlemen, and lifers making progress too hard or impossible. - Constantly changing or unclear requirements - Making penny-wise, pound-foolish decisions for political reasons or budgeting idiosyncracies - Resistance from lawmakers since it would give more government influence to people from states that lean towards some of other party (put more bluntly, Republicans don't want to give a bunch of liberal or left-leaning people from California, Washington, and New York more influence) - The government only seeing the value in surveillance/military software that people are likely to refuse to work on. Not sponsoring software that actually directly helps people domestically What I think we need instead is something like the US Digital Service, along with some other government programs, rolled into a Department of Technology that will hopefully have a completely different culture, payscale, etc. compared to the rest of the government. And maybe even something like jury duty, but for software people, engineers, scientists, etc. so it's more representative of the general public and not the old-school government culture.
- bookofjoe 7y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20733878 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20733878
- not_a_cop75 7y agoLearning or Remembering? or Classifying? lol
- codesushi42 7y agoThe AI isn't "learning" anything. It's being supplied with more observations so that it can better approximate whatever "curve" that is being fit to the data.
- Jun8 7y agoWhat is your definition of learning? I’ve generally seen it being defined as getting better performance on a task, given data.
- dekhn 7y agoI think true learning requires generalization performance- prediction on outgroups which were not represented in the training set (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalization_error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalization_error). It's very similar to when a new theory is able to predict experimental observations that previous theories cannot (general relativity and QM being two great examples).
- dekhn 7y agodo you think humans do something differently?
- codesushi42 7y agoYes. Perhaps you are mistaken and are taking the terminology "neural networks" too literally? Do you think a bird uses its wings any differently than an airplane's to fly?
- dekhn 7y agoI work in ML and have a phd in biophysics; I asked a legitimate question and it's not at all clear that humans "learn" differently than good ML models generalize.
- codesushi42 7y ago
- gorzynsk 7y agoI hope A.I. is smart enough to learn only from smart people. The are not so many of them though...
- sailfast 7y agoEach time I read an article about this I am convinced that any person contributing to this kind of learning algorithm should have the opportunity for equity in the outcome. (perhaps in addition to the wage for doing the task) If I'm a delivery driver roaming all about town with my camera on my dashboard which is tagging street signs and speed limits and other data, do I get a residual if that data is used to make billions of dollars? Do I even get paid .02/mile to collect it, or am I forced in order to have the gig in the first place? A morally straightforward way to make a more equitable future would be to acknowledge how important it was to collect and classify all of this data, and provide the humans that are doing that work with some part of the insane returns of scale that will (and already have been) achieved by these organizations. Sure, you contributed a really really small amount to the overall algorithm, but that really small amount generates billions / trillions of profit, so maybe it scales, and it will scale over time after training is done. I hope we see efforts to do this kind of thing.