Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 228 posts

Re: ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

#171

Post by jillesvangurp »

tomcam wrote: post #29

I can personally vouch that Amazon, Twitter, and YouTube all do horrible horrible jobs predicting my taste. And they have got worse over the years, not better

Yep, Spotify, Amazon, Youtube, Google etc. they all use the same three algorithms:

- the more of the same thing algorithm. You clicked this thing, would you like to click it again. And again. And some more.

- the ever popular "we've shown you this thing a hundred times now and you never clicked it; we'll just assume we are right and you are wrong" algorithm.

- the ooooh we've detected that your ip address is in Germany and predict that you are now fluent in German. Would you like some Schnitzel with you Schlager music? This one in particular drives me nuts. I have user profiles with these companies for many years, browser settings that specify a preferred language, etc. I consistently never do anything in German with them. And they'll go ... here's some German content for you. Completely useless and obviously the only criteria they use for these recommendation is location. Worse, if I travel they'll unhelpfully suggest things for those locations as well. Basically, most of their top recommendations are the same generic stuff that they serve to everybody else in the same location.

Recommendation engines are hard and these companies gave up years ago and instead routinely by pass their own AI with some simple if .. else logic. I know how this stuff works. There's a little corner in the UI for the cute AI kids to do their thing but essentially all the prime real estate in their UIs is reserved for good old if else logic, basic profiling, and whatever their marketing department wants to promote to everybody.

If user in Germany recommend generic German stuff. There's no logical explanation other than that for the absolute garbage recommended by default. If you clicked a thing, here's some more things from the same source in random order. Amazon has a notion of books being in a certain order ... so why recommend I start with part 21 of a 50 book series by an author I've never bothered to read? Maybe book 1 would be a better start ... Book series are great value for them because if I get hooked, I consume the whole thing.

Most recommendations are just variations of simple profiling (age, sex, location) that consistently trump actual recommendations combined with very rudimentary similarity algorithms. You don't need AI for any of that. I work with search engine technology, it's not that hard.

Re: ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

#172

Post by sacrosancty »

Melatonic wrote: post #97
malkia wrote: post #75

Some years ago, I worked on a team "Ads Human Eval" - we had raters hired to do A/B testing for ads. These evaluated questionaires carefuly crafted by our linguists, and then analyzed by the statisticians providing feedback to the (internal) group that wanted to know more about. So the best experience was this internal event that we had, where the raters would say that certain Ad would not fare well (long term), whil…

I dont think most people are arguing that machines will replace everyone anytime soon - it is that they will replace a huge portion of people. If one person can do the job of 10,000 by being the tweaker / approver of an advanced AI that is still 9,999 jobs eliminated. That might be hyperbole (you still probably will need people to support that system)

Yea machines did that to laborers and computers did that to clerks, yet people still have jobs.

Re: ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

#174

Post by oriolid »

jsjohnst wrote: post #122
thaumasiotes wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We know that's not the reason; Amazon is infamous for advertising washing machines to people who have just bought a washing machine from Amazon.

Amazon can’t suggest a “product you might like” if their life depended on it. They have 19 years of purchase history for me spanning thousands of product categories. Want to know a category I’ve never looked at or bought from Amazon, women's handbags. What’s near the top of the suggestions right now on the homepage for me? You guessed it!

The weirdest thing is that at one point, I think it's now almost 10 years, they had somewhat OK recommendations. It's not like "you bought programming books and Battlestar Galactica DVDs, so you might be interested in Neal Stephenson's novels" is really advanced but it's still miles ahead of the "you just bought a washing machine, so you might be interested in washing machines" level.

Re: ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

#176

Post by heavyset_go »

sacrosancty wrote: post #172
Melatonic wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont think most people are arguing that machines will replace everyone anytime soon - it is that they will replace a huge portion of people. If one person can do the job of 10,000 by being the tweaker / approver of an advanced AI that is still 9,999 jobs eliminated. That might be hyperbole (you still probably will need people to support that system)

Yea machines did that to laborers and computers did that to clerks, yet people still have jobs.

People today have jobs, but what we don't hear about are the people who were made redundant and the suffering they went through. They're just forgotten about, or even ridiculed, like the Luddites are today. For the Luddites who were not shot by the state or factory owners, or were tried and literally executed by the state for machine breaking, the rest of them and their families lived and died in utter destitution having formerly lived comfortable lives as skilled laborers and small business owners themselves.

Post-2008 did that to a lot of workers, as well, causing some of them to leave the workforce entirely. I know more people than I'd like to who are over 60 now, but were made redundant in the wake of the financial crisis and economic restructuring. They never worked in their fields again, some of them were forced to retire and others are working dead end jobs for $10 an hour despite having been middle to upper middle class a decade or so prior.

Sure, maybe their kids or their grandkids might be able to dig themselves out of the hole their parents were forced to drag them down into, but that doesn't do much for people who lost their livelihoods and have died/will die in destitution.

Re: ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

#177

Post by occamrazor »

vasco wrote: post #142
malkia wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but it's true that some jobs should not simply exists. To this day, if I go to our airport in Sofia (Bulgaria), and my baggage is over the limit of 20 or was it 25kg I have to go to another place, pay for it and come back (why? bureaucracy - not only I have to do it, but I'm slowing anyone waiting for me to this - it's like 25-50 meters one place to the other) Unlike Frakfurt, Munich or Heathrow airport wher…

Meanwhile if you fatten up by 20kgs you fly for the same price. Just eat your clothes!

I have occasionally seen people wearing far too many clothes to make the luggage smaller/lighter.

Re: ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

#178

Post by potatoman22 »

ninkendo wrote: post #113
treesprite82 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean basically that is what ML is, trying to predict the future If being so reductive, that's also the scientific method. Form a model on some existing data, with the goal of it being predictive on new unseen data. Key is in favoring the more predictive models. > they called it magic, we call it math, but both seem to have about the same outcome Find me some sheep entrails that can do this: https://imagen.researc…

One of the oft overlooked, yet critically important aspects of the scientific method is the hypothesis. You don’t design an experiment having absolutely no idea what to expect. You have an educated guess in mind (the hypothesis), and you design the experiment in such a way that says “this result will rule out my hypothesis, while this other result might confirm it.” Just trying two things at random and picking the on…

The trained model is the hypothesis. We test the hypothesis by validating the model against unseen data.

Re: ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

#179

Post by stackbutterflow »

Melatonic wrote: post #97
malkia wrote: post #75

Some years ago, I worked on a team "Ads Human Eval" - we had raters hired to do A/B testing for ads. These evaluated questionaires carefuly crafted by our linguists, and then analyzed by the statisticians providing feedback to the (internal) group that wanted to know more about. So the best experience was this internal event that we had, where the raters would say that certain Ad would not fare well (long term), whil…

I dont think most people are arguing that machines will replace everyone anytime soon - it is that they will replace a huge portion of people. If one person can do the job of 10,000 by being the tweaker / approver of an advanced AI that is still 9,999 jobs eliminated. That might be hyperbole (you still probably will need people to support that system)

You don't even that to go as high as 10,000. Imagine someone suddenly doing the job of 10 persons, that's entire teams being decimated. Go to a job board and imagine 9 of out 10 job postings not existing. How much harder it'll be to seek another job.

Re: ML is not that good at predicting consumers' choices

#180

Post by sandworm101 »

vasco wrote: post #142
malkia wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but it's true that some jobs should not simply exists. To this day, if I go to our airport in Sofia (Bulgaria), and my baggage is over the limit of 20 or was it 25kg I have to go to another place, pay for it and come back (why? bureaucracy - not only I have to do it, but I'm slowing anyone waiting for me to this - it's like 25-50 meters one place to the other) Unlike Frakfurt, Munich or Heathrow airport wher…

Meanwhile if you fatten up by 20kgs you fly for the same price. Just eat your clothes!

The baggage weight limit has nothing to do with the weight of the aircraft. It is about keeping the bags light enough for handling, to protect the backs of baggage handlers (and automated equipment/belts). Unlike thier heavy bag, a heavy passenger is generally capable of walking themselves onto the plane.
Post reply on HN