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

DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 84 posts

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#21

Post by Danihan »

scandox wrote: post #20
Danihan wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at red lights as an example. Those are just primitive robots. Yet, when I'm sitting at an empty intersection at night, even though I have excellent, advanced sensors in my eyes, I'm not allowed to just run a red light. Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The robots already have the final say in that arena, because human law (for now) backs them up. It's not based on scary movies... primitive robots alrea…

Great example. I'm delighted that the robots have the final say on this. Long may they override your advanced sensors.

You may be an authoritarian if... ^

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#22

Post by Danihan »

cortesoft wrote: post #17
Danihan wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at red lights as an example. Those are just primitive robots. Yet, when I'm sitting at an empty intersection at night, even though I have excellent, advanced sensors in my eyes, I'm not allowed to just run a red light. Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The robots already have the final say in that arena, because human law (for now) backs them up. It's not based on scary movies... primitive robots alrea…

You absolutely can run the red light, it would just be against the law. That has nothing to do with robots. We have been making laws that limit what we can do for millennia.

The law has everything to do with robots and how they will integrate with society, like it or not.

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#23

Post by kartikt »

grinich wrote: post #16

Kind of crazy the Google Cloud team is using gmail.js to build this extension. Gmail.js is a side project by Kartik Talwar who just graduated college and the codebase isn't exactly active. I guess even Google can't find a good way to extend Gmail with their own APIs...

lol

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#24

Post by grinich »

kartikt wrote: post #23
grinich wrote: post #16

Kind of crazy the Google Cloud team is using gmail.js to build this extension. Gmail.js is a side project by Kartik Talwar who just graduated college and the codebase isn't exactly active. I guess even Google can't find a good way to extend Gmail with their own APIs...

lol

(hey folks downvoting... this comment is by Kartik Talwar.)

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#25

Post by primitivesuave »

Danihan wrote: post #12
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anytime someone has a scary thought about ML it all comes down to control problems - eg. the machine having the final say about what happens without human being able to override it. In gmail now, if you say "attached" in your email but don't attach something, you can still send the message, it just gives you a warning. You're consistently shown improved interfaces and content because of ML, yet those aren't scary and…

Look at red lights as an example. Those are just primitive robots. Yet, when I'm sitting at an empty intersection at night, even though I have excellent, advanced sensors in my eyes, I'm not allowed to just run a red light. Red lights aren't just a "helpful warning." The robots already have the final say in that arena, because human law (for now) backs them up. It's not based on scary movies... primitive robots alrea…

Brilliant example! Though it seems more an example of humans giving a robot the final say, rather than a robot earning the final say based on the merit of its predictions.

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#26

Post by iamatworknow »

coredog64 wrote: post #11
draw_down wrote: post #5

I think anger is ok and justified at times, and not always just a consequence of being in the wrong state of mind, etc. I think we're more and more moving to a mindset where anger is just not really ever acceptable, either to feel or to display. But, that's all a bit heavy for what this is trying to accomplish, which is certainly an understandable goal.

True story: I sent a technically correct, succinct email to someone in another division. They complained up to their VP, who talked to my VP, and then the s t rolled downhill on me. Allegedly, the problem was that I hadn't apologized that they were having a bad experience with a service that we offer.

I've also started questioning how I phrase my own work related e-mails.

Yesterday I was sent one from a partner saying that some files we were to transfer to their FTP server (yeah, I know it's 2017) were missing. So I logged into the server manually and checked -- the files were there, created at 5 AM, just like they are everyday when the cron job that generates them was run. So I started my response by saying, "I just checked the server manually and the files were there. Why do you consider them missing?"

But then I started to think...would this reply come off as if I were questioning their intelligence? They must believe that the files actually aren't there, or else they wouldn't have sent me an e-mail asking. The same process has been running everyday since February of last year, however, and presumably they had never failed to find the files before yesterday.

I just sent the e-mail anyway, but it is interesting that I've been conditioned to question myself over a very innocuous reply to make sure my tone was appropriate, as to not risk offending the other party.

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#27

Post by cortesoft »

Danihan wrote: post #22
cortesoft wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You absolutely can run the red light, it would just be against the law. That has nothing to do with robots. We have been making laws that limit what we can do for millennia.

The law has everything to do with robots and how they will integrate with society, like it or not.

Right, which is exactly my point.... the law is the thing to worry about, not the robots.

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#28

Post by LeifCarrotson »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #6
oakwhiz wrote: post #4

I wonder if machine learning will lead to worsening of the echo-chamber problem. "Error: The message cannot be sent because it does not conform to accepted groupthink."

Anytime someone has a scary thought about ML it all comes down to control problems - eg. the machine having the final say about what happens without human being able to override it. In gmail now, if you say "attached" in your email but don't attach something, you can still send the message, it just gives you a warning. You're consistently shown improved interfaces and content because of ML, yet those aren't scary and…

https://www.xkcd.com/251/

> Cueball: Hey. Hey! Stop retracting my CD!

> I feel uncomfortable when my computer physically struggles with me. Sure, I can overpower it now, but it feels like a few short steps from here to the robot war.

Another step towards this war is the Bluetooth connection in my wife's car. As a passenger, I cannot connect my phone to play music, directions, or make calls unless the car is in park, because "This function is not available while moving". And I hate it. We don't want to sit and wait to set off while its 8-year-old Bluetooth hardware pairs, we want to get going and let the navigator do the navigating.

Fortunately, this contrasts with the Waze navigation app's message box which actually detects motion using the GPS, and displays "Typing is disabled while driving - OK / Passenger"

Re: DeepBreath: Preventing angry emails with machine learning

#29

Post by siliconc0w »

draw_down wrote: post #5

I think anger is ok and justified at times, and not always just a consequence of being in the wrong state of mind, etc. I think we're more and more moving to a mindset where anger is just not really ever acceptable, either to feel or to display. But, that's all a bit heavy for what this is trying to accomplish, which is certainly an understandable goal.

Anger is definitely not okay. Ideally, you say - 'This project isn't working because you failed to gather requirements from the right users." or "You spent three months choosing a vendor without proper due diligence who doesn't have a working client library, documentation, or a functioning test endpoint".

However the proper way to express anger in our enlightened business environment is passively and non specifically. "I'm unsure that this project is accomplishing it's goals." or "the team is having trouble with the vendor you chose" and then you schedule a 1:1 meeting to talk about it over a warm beverage where you adhere to a 10:1 complement to criticism ratio.

Post reply on HN