3 ms·
The immediate flaw in that approach is that "patio11 et al" are top contributers because they post a lot and have valuable opinions - NOT because they are alway
by tobyjsullivan 14y ago
The immediate flaw in that approach is that "patio11 et al" are top contributers because they post a lot and have valuable opinions - NOT because they are always right. They're not (I'm confident they would agree here). Therefore their opinions would be inappropriate as an AI training set.
- waterlesscloud 14y agoThat's true. But doesn't that kind of sidestep the question? It's always going to be a matter of opinion what constitutes middlebrow-dismissalness, so if we accept that then the question is really: "Is it possible to automatically determine if this post would be judged in this way by this person (or group of people)?" It seems like that's a question that has at least a possibility of a "yes" answer.
- daniel-levin 14y agoSure, totally agree, but a consensus by verified posters was more of what I was aiming for
- spion 14y agoI guess I am going to pitch my potential solution again: http://gkosev.blogspot.com/2012/08/fixing-hacker-news-mathematical-approach.html?m=1 http://gkosev.blogspot.com/2012/08/fixing-hacker-news-mathem... it would probably have more weight when i release the test code and datasets though...