4 ms·

That doesn't really excuse it, the news outlet has a responsibility to educate itself on basic matters (eg ML vs AI). Even if they have refused to do so before

That doesn't really excuse it, the news outlet has a responsibility to educate itself on basic matters (eg ML vs AI). Even if they have refused to do so before now. Granted, I've not met many newsrooms with a serious conceptualization of "responsibility" beyond whatever bullshit they learned in school.

IanCal 3y ago
ML is either a subset of or synonymous with AI depending on how you want to frame it. This has been true for a long time, it's not a new thing. What does seem new is people trying to argue that ML isn't AI. It's not a historically useful distinction and it's not useful for understanding articles now.
- JeffSnazz 3y ago
  > What does seem new is people trying to argue that ML isn't AI. Well, ML is a well-defined class of processes, calling it AI seems a little disingenuous. Is a beam search still considered AI? How about Markov chains? It's much easier to refer to the specific processes rather than vague floating signifiers if you want to communicate clearly, which I would argue is a primary responsibility of journalists. It doesn't bode well for reporting if journalists aren't zeroed in on this problem of de-jargonizing tech reporting in the first place, and this leaves them vulnerable to essentially marketing ploys that inherently misrepresent the capabilities of the software.
  - IanCal 3y ago
    > calling it AI seems a little disingenuous. Why? It's been done for a long time. The whole field has been referred to as AI for decades, nobody was standing up in my lectures saying "No! SVMs aren't AI!". > It doesn't bode well for reporting if journalists aren't zeroed in on this problem of de-jargonizing tech reporting in the first place, and this leaves them vulnerable to essentially marketing ploys that inherently misrepresent the capabilities of the software. Referring to the things used here as AI is entirely consistent with how I've seen the term used dating back beyond when people would ask me if AI was to do with aliens. Simpler things have been called AI in the public sphere too, so it's not a new thing being sprung on people. I don't think people have generally been confused by a camera that says it has AI thinking it's sentient.
    - JeffSnazz 3y ago
      > The whole field has been referred to as AI for decades Yea, everyone else has been laughing at you for this the whole time. It's a dumb term for anything but encouraging rubes to fork over cash for stuff that looks like magic. > Referring to the things used here as AI is entirely consistent with how I've seen the term used dating back beyond when people would ask me if AI was to do with aliens. Simpler things have been called AI in the public sphere too, so it's not a new thing being sprung on people. Maybe you should consider communicating more directly and effectively. > I don't think people have generally been confused by a camera that says it has AI thinking it's sentient. You should talk to more people. This is 100% a problem.
      - IanCal 3y ago
        > Yea, everyone else has been laughing at you for this the whole time Almost nobody really knew about the field not that long ago. > Maybe you should consider communicating more directly and effectively. I don't understand what you mean. People had seen the film AI and misremembered it having aliens in, and when I said my course was AI that's what they thought about. > You should talk to more people. This is 100% a problem. I don't believe you that people generally believe that cameras and the like have been sentient for years.

IanCal 3y ago

ML is either a subset of or synonymous with AI depending on how you want to frame it. This has been true for a long time, it's not a new thing. What does seem new is people trying to argue that ML isn't AI. It's not a historically useful distinction and it's not useful for understanding articles now.

JeffSnazz 3y ago
> What does seem new is people trying to argue that ML isn't AI. Well, ML is a well-defined class of processes, calling it AI seems a little disingenuous. Is a beam search still considered AI? How about Markov chains? It's much easier to refer to the specific processes rather than vague floating signifiers if you want to communicate clearly, which I would argue is a primary responsibility of journalists. It doesn't bode well for reporting if journalists aren't zeroed in on this problem of de-jargonizing tech reporting in the first place, and this leaves them vulnerable to essentially marketing ploys that inherently misrepresent the capabilities of the software.
- IanCal 3y ago
  > calling it AI seems a little disingenuous. Why? It's been done for a long time. The whole field has been referred to as AI for decades, nobody was standing up in my lectures saying "No! SVMs aren't AI!". > It doesn't bode well for reporting if journalists aren't zeroed in on this problem of de-jargonizing tech reporting in the first place, and this leaves them vulnerable to essentially marketing ploys that inherently misrepresent the capabilities of the software. Referring to the things used here as AI is entirely consistent with how I've seen the term used dating back beyond when people would ask me if AI was to do with aliens. Simpler things have been called AI in the public sphere too, so it's not a new thing being sprung on people. I don't think people have generally been confused by a camera that says it has AI thinking it's sentient.
  - JeffSnazz 3y ago
    > The whole field has been referred to as AI for decades Yea, everyone else has been laughing at you for this the whole time. It's a dumb term for anything but encouraging rubes to fork over cash for stuff that looks like magic. > Referring to the things used here as AI is entirely consistent with how I've seen the term used dating back beyond when people would ask me if AI was to do with aliens. Simpler things have been called AI in the public sphere too, so it's not a new thing being sprung on people. Maybe you should consider communicating more directly and effectively. > I don't think people have generally been confused by a camera that says it has AI thinking it's sentient. You should talk to more people. This is 100% a problem.
    - IanCal 3y ago
      > Yea, everyone else has been laughing at you for this the whole time Almost nobody really knew about the field not that long ago. > Maybe you should consider communicating more directly and effectively. I don't understand what you mean. People had seen the film AI and misremembered it having aliens in, and when I said my course was AI that's what they thought about. > You should talk to more people. This is 100% a problem. I don't believe you that people generally believe that cameras and the like have been sentient for years.