4 ms·
The patterns my system noticed were literally things like this: There's an error entered into the system by the NOC operator as an intermittent error on the st
by gyulai 7y ago
The patterns my system noticed were literally things like this: There's an error entered into the system by the NOC operator as an intermittent error on the station. Field technician drives there. Enters something like "Station on air upon arrival" into the ticket system. Does nothing else. (Like nothing to diagnose or fix the actual problem). Closes the incident. Drives home. Pockets the money for the time spent driving. A few days later (who would have thought that?) a new incident is opened for the same station. Repeat once a week for months and months.
I'm definitely not someone who is too naive to understand that technology like NLP has limits. But this was a perfectly appropriate usecase for NLP and it worked perfectly fine.
And people acting in this manner should not be immune from repercussions for reasons of data protection.
- gyulai 7y ago...also, it seems weird to me that workers representatives knew, before the project even started, that it was in their best interest to ask for this data to be anonymized. It was as if workers, collectively, knew the whole time that this sort of thing was systematically happening, and were actively working towards preventing management from finding out. That's what I mean by "not pulling on the same string".