181–190 of 639 posts
The point that the author is making, in a very understated way, is that all three companies have PR websites that breathlessly describe their advanced AI capabilities, yet they cannot understand a very simple query that young children can.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Generally, yes. But you can go very far and cover a lot of cases when you stick to a narrow domain and common patterns that customers of your product will typically use.
My reaction to Siri is either amazement at how well it worked or disgust in its failure on seemingly simple queries.
But Siri is a general domain problem, which is really really hard. Siri set the expectation you can ask it anything, and it works terribly and for most questions just gives up and runs a web search.
If you are an e-commerce company though, that's a narrow enough domain, because you know that for most people, they're looking for products to buy or compare. It's not an unbounded Q&A service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you want to sell shirts without stripes to customers who want them.
I expect most users genuinely looking for such a product would just search "plain shirt"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every systems sucks at NLP. It is an extremely hard problem and we are nowhere near matching the human cerebral cortex.
Generally, yes. But you can go very far and cover a lot of cases when you stick to a narrow domain and common patterns that customers of your product will typically use.
Lots of focus on a general purpose mono-model, but I think a collection of specialized subsystems is a better representation and would produce better results, faster.
To me, the most interesting implication here is that this must not adversely affect Google's ad revenue. If it did, they would surely fix it. This, in turn, means that apparently we have been trained to interface with search engines such that this is not a problem. Sometimes I wonder how much my brain has changed to use search engines / how much of it is dedicated to effective googling. Makes me feel like a cyborg.
This is the issue I think. Amazon doesn’t care about selling a shirt without stripes, it is just as happy as selling any shirt. This assumes that AI wants truth. These three companies AI don’t necessarily want truth, they want revenue.
The point that the author is making, in a very understated way, is that all three companies have PR websites that breathlessly describe their advanced AI capabilities, yet they cannot understand a very simple query that young children can.
Google has gotten better, it's just HNer expectations that have changed as they expect more and more magic.
For example, the subtitle on the repo is "Stupid AI" when this query has never worked in these search engines, and it won't anytime soon.
You'd think the technical HN crowd would be more advanced than to make the same mistakes that (they complain that) stakeholders/users/gamers make when they mistakenly think everything is much easier than it actually is. Things aren't "stupid" just because they can't yet read your mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you mean, "Please don't imagine a pink elephant." Imagining a non-pink elephant seems pretty easy.
Along these lines, I once heard somewhere that people do not process the word 'dont'. As a coach, I've had to shift my vocabulary to focus on the 'do's rather than the 'dont's Eg: If you're doing a sport where leaning forward is bad, avoid telling yourself 'dont lean forward' as your mind only hears 'lean forward', therefore reinforcing the thing you're trying to avoid. Alternatively, tell yourself 'lean back' or 'st…
The point that the author is making, in a very understated way, is that all three companies have PR websites that breathlessly describe their advanced AI capabilities, yet they cannot understand a very simple query that young children can.
I disagree, "shirt without stripes" is an unusual word choice, not one that our ML models would be optimized for. Try "solid color shirt" and you'll see how much better the results are - at least on Google.
If your "ML algorithm" doesn't understand straightforward language, how is it any better than a couple if-then statements?
Beyond that, I'm unsure how you think " without " is at all unusual or difficult to decipher.