2 ms·

There is a world of difference between being failable and doing a monumentally worse job. While the article is playing up the incident, it is better to say that

by II2II 2y ago

There is a world of difference between being failable and doing a monumentally worse job. While the article is playing up the incident, it is better to say that the author discovered the filter is failable. Sure, file a bug report. Sure, point out that we should be applying our own judgment when the machine tells us something (or anyone tells us something, for that matter). Yet I am not seeing any evidence here that this is a systematic problem. I also have doubts that it is a truly solvable problem. We can make the technology progressively better, but it will always be imperfect. The problem should have been presented as a reminder to use our own brains. Nothing more and nothing less.

latexr 2y ago
> While the article is playing up the incident Hard disagree. Saying “This seems… bad” is as mild as can be. > Yet I am not seeing any evidence here that this is a systematic problem. That was not the argument. How could this be systematic when the system isn’t even out for everyone? > We can make the technology progressively better, but it will always be imperfect. No one claimed it had to be perfect. But this is not better, or even equal, either. > There is a world of difference between being failable and doing a monumentally worse job. This didn’t simply “fail”, it actively pushed the user to something that would have been harmful to them. There is also a world of difference between “failed to detect message as phishing and treated as any other” and “pushed phishing message to the top of your inbox and marked it as priority”.
- brookst 2y ago
  > Hard disagree. Saying “This seems… bad” is as mild as can be. I’m confused about that sentiment. The same developer beta has alarms that fail to go off (or go off at the wrong time). Among many other bugs. Is your view that a developer beta must not have any flaws that would be catastrophic in a public release?
  - latexr 2y ago
    > I’m confused about that sentiment. I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. All I mean is that I disagree that “playing up the incident” is an accurate description of the post. > Is your view that a developer beta must not have any flaws that would be catastrophic in a public release? It is not. Quite the contrary, betas serve the purpose of highlighting and fixing flaws. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41160141 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41160141

by II2II 2y ago

latexr 2y ago

> While the article is playing up the incident Hard disagree. Saying “This seems… bad” is as mild as can be. > Yet I am not seeing any evidence here that this is a systematic problem. That was not the argument. How could this be systematic when the system isn’t even out for everyone? > We can make the technology progressively better, but it will always be imperfect. No one claimed it had to be perfect. But this is not better, or even equal, either. > There is a world of difference between being failable and doing a monumentally worse job. This didn’t simply “fail”, it actively pushed the user to something that would have been harmful to them. There is also a world of difference between “failed to detect message as phishing and treated as any other” and “pushed phishing message to the top of your inbox and marked it as priority”.

brookst 2y ago
> Hard disagree. Saying “This seems… bad” is as mild as can be. I’m confused about that sentiment. The same developer beta has alarms that fail to go off (or go off at the wrong time). Among many other bugs. Is your view that a developer beta must not have any flaws that would be catastrophic in a public release?
- latexr 2y ago
  > I’m confused about that sentiment. I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. All I mean is that I disagree that “playing up the incident” is an accurate description of the post. > Is your view that a developer beta must not have any flaws that would be catastrophic in a public release? It is not. Quite the contrary, betas serve the purpose of highlighting and fixing flaws. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41160141 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41160141