3 ms·
My guess is: Amazon writes that 99% is the recommended threshold because there is little chance of false positive. If an agency is deploying this system and com
by ajzinsbwbs 6y ago
My guess is: Amazon writes that 99% is the recommended threshold because there is little chance of false positive. If an agency is deploying this system and complains that it isn’t working well, a solutions architect will say in a meeting (but not in writing) to lower the threshold. If it comes out that false positives occur, AWS isn’t responsible.
- abiogenesis 6y agoTrue, but one can't blame Amazon in this case. The agency can reduce the threshold to 0% (ad absurdum) and claim that Amazon's technology is not working.
- perl4ever 6y agoYou can blame Amazon if there's no point on the threshold scale where it works adequately.
- abiogenesis 6y agoI guess one must define "adequate" first. The default value of 80% could work fine if you are developing a "find your celebrity doppelgänger" game while law enforcement should probably use 99%.
- perl4ever 6y agoI think you'd have a point at which the threshold increases but the probability of the true positive being in your results starts to drop severely. 99% might be useless if you have one or two hits and they are unlikely to be correct. You can't assume that the one you're looking for will be a 100% match; if it was, then you'd just set the threshold to that, presto.