3 ms·

I think it'd be embarrassing if the tech was making this sort of mistake in a high % of cases. Anecdotally, that's the only account I've read of this kind of e

I think it'd be embarrassing if the tech was making this sort of mistake in a high % of cases. Anecdotally, that's the only account I've read of this kind of error. Not defending Facebook, they ought to deploy humans in the loop. But saying the tech is embarrassing misses how machine learning works. It will always make mistakes, and the kind of mistakes that seem silly from a human perspective. That's because, well, these systems aren't human.

bertil 3y ago
Those mistakes are systematic. I worked on the team that dealt with that, and you pretty much can’t mention exotic animals by name if you sell books, movies, fan art, etc.
johnnyanmac 3y ago
>that's the only account I've read of this kind of error. it's still anecdotal, but the author did mention that they went to FB/LinkedIn and they got a pretty swift answer. If nothing else, it sounds like it wasn't a unique case (or the author has a very tight knit group of tech isntructors).
- rmbyrro 3y ago
  What I mean is, there are certainly a lot more than 2 or 3 individuals or businesses that have ever advertised on FB for Python and Pandas (programming) stuff. Courses, recruiting, books, events, commercial libraries, etc. If this kind of error was systematic, no one would be able to run these ads. We'd have certainly already seen a public outcry about it. That doesn't seem to be the case, here (yet)?..
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    I did leave the possibility of "tight nit group of tech instructors". With that said, it's not impossible for this to be a systematic issue considering (theoretically, I don't have formal evidence) 1. Facebook may not be the best place to reach out to the tech community 2. There may simply be too many positives (so, actual exotic animal trading) for it to be worth fixing the few false positives. And the author lacked the financial worth to properly fix the issue. 3. At the end of the day, the issue was not resolved. Leaving the potential next victim wanting to talk about Python laying in wake. I subscribe to #2 personally.

bertil 3y ago

Those mistakes are systematic. I worked on the team that dealt with that, and you pretty much can’t mention exotic animals by name if you sell books, movies, fan art, etc.

johnnyanmac 3y ago

>that's the only account I've read of this kind of error. it's still anecdotal, but the author did mention that they went to FB/LinkedIn and they got a pretty swift answer. If nothing else, it sounds like it wasn't a unique case (or the author has a very tight knit group of tech isntructors).

rmbyrro 3y ago
What I mean is, there are certainly a lot more than 2 or 3 individuals or businesses that have ever advertised on FB for Python and Pandas (programming) stuff. Courses, recruiting, books, events, commercial libraries, etc. If this kind of error was systematic, no one would be able to run these ads. We'd have certainly already seen a public outcry about it. That doesn't seem to be the case, here (yet)?..
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  I did leave the possibility of "tight nit group of tech instructors". With that said, it's not impossible for this to be a systematic issue considering (theoretically, I don't have formal evidence) 1. Facebook may not be the best place to reach out to the tech community 2. There may simply be too many positives (so, actual exotic animal trading) for it to be worth fixing the few false positives. And the author lacked the financial worth to properly fix the issue. 3. At the end of the day, the issue was not resolved. Leaving the potential next victim wanting to talk about Python laying in wake. I subscribe to #2 personally.