3 ms·
This is a specific issue of a general problem of AI/computer judging, where humans think they're judging on specific criteria, and write it into the computer, w
by jerf 3y ago
This is a specific issue of a general problem of AI/computer judging, where humans think they're judging on specific criteria, and write it into the computer, without ever taking a moment to ask whether that's actually what they want.
I use speeding in vehicles a lot. The point of a 55MPH speed limit isn't really that cars should be going exactly 55MPH at all times. It's an approximation of a complex situation that could handle only one number. But it's not actually a law of physics. Rigidly handing out tickets for people doing 56MPH is missing the point of speed limit. (As are many of the "You're doing X over" flashing signs, generally put in places that are precisely where the speed limit is too low and what people are doing is actually fine.)
Now that we finally have the technology to determine whether a gymnast was or was not one millimeter over some line, the question should be raised, is that what we actually want to judge on? Because just because we humans thought we were judging on that, just because we thought that's what we wanted, is it really?
It is this examination step that has been missing in every rush to insert computers into some judging system. We thoughtlessly reify accidents of history and what used to be easy to judge. At least in the case of gymnastics we're not going to send anyone to jail because of such thoughtlessness, but the sport could be destroyed. In the end, it still needs views, however abstracted the sports may seem to be from that, and after the novelty wears off, seeing humans out there competing for the most robotic and soulless performances runs the risk of gradually, but steadily, destroying all support for the sport.
Now, personally, I'm not sure this wouldn't be a net gain for humanity in this particular place. But it's certainly not what the gymastics community as a whole wants and they really need to slow down and apply some thought to what they really want before they let someone reify that into code.
They won't. Nobody else is either, for things far more important than this. But they should.
- fabioz 3y agoParticularly, I'd say that it would be awesome and could save sports which are graded based on such rules as the current state of affairs is pretty appalling (I hate seeing competitions which are graded based on subjective things and judge biases, for me it's the opposite -- such biases make seeing these sports maddening for me up to the point that I prefer not watching at all as I'm 100% sure it's unfair from the start).
- DonsDiscountGas 3y agoI agree with your overall point, although there are reasons why we use hard cutoffs like that: they are objective. If somebody is traveling at 55 mph on a straight highway, on a clear warm sunny day, they can be sure[0] they aren't breaking any laws. Everybody recognizes it's not perfect; but in reality a cop isn't going to a write a ticket for 56 in a 55 (unless they have some ulterior motive). They might write a ticket for dangerous driving at 45 if the conditions are bad enough. There's still some human element, but we try to minimize it because it creates an opportunity for corruption and inequality in enforcement of laws. In the case of sports the judging is supposed to have a human element, but the judges are supposed to only care about the performance and routine and not stuff like the nationality of the gymnast. Which is an unrealistic hope frankly. So pick your poison; either we take subjective human judgement and accept it will wanted and unwanted subjective elements, or we do this stuff and remove subjectivity. [0] There's always measurement error but that's a separate issue.