5 ms·
I wouldn't call that rational. There is no reason you can't apply human weighting on top of ML. Honestly, I don't believe for a minute they "can't fix it." The
by robbrown451 5y ago
I wouldn't call that rational. There is no reason you can't apply human weighting on top of ML.
Honestly, I don't believe for a minute they "can't fix it." They do this sort of thing all the time, for instance when ML shows dark skinned people for a search for gorilla, they obviously have recourse.
- htrp 5y agoYou do know that Google basically slapped a patch on that one right? https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/12/16882408/google-racist-gorillas-photo-recognition-algorithm-ai https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/12/16882408/google-racist-go...
- brigandish 5y agoI’m confused. I read that article and it has this: > But, as a new report from Wired shows, nearly three years on and Google hasn’t really fixed anything. The company has simply blocked its image recognition algorithms from identifying gorillas altogether — preferring, presumably, to limit the service rather than risk another miscategorization. Is that not an example of human intervention in ML?
- robbrown451 5y agoYes but then they fixed it right.
- htrp 5y agoFixing it right would be re-training the ML algo.... they basically told the algo to never ID anything as a gorilla (even actual gorillas)