4 ms·
Can I ask what your credentials are? And could you write a post addressing their points? Edit: that sounds hostile, it isn't meant to, just curious.
by hammyhavoc 4y ago
Can I ask what your credentials are? And could you write a post addressing their points?
Edit: that sounds hostile, it isn't meant to, just curious.
- anon9384929 4y agoStop defaulting to asking for sources or credentials and make your own case for why we should listen to the authors points
- deltree7 4y agoSee above.
- hammyhavoc 4y agoI don't have enough knowledge on the topic to say whether the article is good or bad, nor if I should listen to someone on HN who says it is bad, hence asking to know what the credentials of someone are who attacked someone else's lack of credentials, yet made no actual intellectual counterpoints. Stop telling strangers how to live their life. That's some control freak territory.
- _8j50 4y agoThe person they are replying to made it about credentials
- the_only_law 4y agoDon’t whip out credentials as a way of discounting someone if you aren’t ready to have your own pulled.
- deltree7 4y ago1) The Author has no clue about the details of the contract. 2) The Author has no clue about the capabilities of AI (Google or Amazon). 3) The Author has no clue about where the systems are deployed. 4) The Author has no clue about laws of Israel. 5) The Author has no clue about protections of ordinary citizens for mis-use / abuse of technology from the constitutions. 6) The Author has no clue about long term, net benefits (or harm) to the society not only from the current state, but potential continuous innovation that will happen increasing the net benefit of such projects to the society. 7) But more importantly, the author sitting in his comfortable chair living a privileged life, has the audacity to preach how Isrealis should ignore threat to their lives and sovereignty so that they can satisfy someone's arbitrary judgement of things that they are clueless about. I can understand as a global citizen, if they want to pass certain law to protect privacy of individuals. But that is not the theme of the post. The post is literally about "Big Corp Evil". Any idiot can write that post.
- data_maan 4y agoCan you bring any concrete proof about what exactly the author has no clue about? For example, regarding 3), can you tell us where those systems are being used? Regarding 4), what laws do you specifically refer to? Without that information it's just the author's word ("Google is evil") against yours ("Google is not evil"). Though your word is more aggressive, which doesn't really help your argument.
- jjulius 4y ago>Without that information it's just the author's word ("Google is evil") against yours ("Google is not evil"). Though your word is more aggressive, which doesn't really help your argument. Right? What was that that they said about this being a "complex, nuanced" discussion? :)
- z9znz 4y ago> net benefit of such projects to the society If by “net benefits” you mean “helps in many cases but sacrifices a few people due to false positives”, then I see your point. But you never really said why the author was wrong. You just expanded your critique of the author himself. The author has valid concerns, and one doesn’t need to be an AI researcher to know that content analysis AI is woefully unreliable thus far. We see examples nearly every day here on HN where these systems (often Google’s or YouTube’s) have made wrong judgements that defy explanation.