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

Machine Learning Fairy Dust

stdout.be

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–35 of 35 posts

Re: Machine Learning Fairy Dust

#31

Post by makmanalp »

lotu wrote: post #30
makmanalp wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, everyone assumed that no one knew knew about anything they did on the net. They thought that when they looked at an oven mitt in an online store, only they knew about it. The truth was that information was just unused by the store, and so the user never saw it. Gradually, this notion became slowly dispelled when stores actually started leveraging this information to provide, for example, suggestions. It's all…

So use, ad block and/or incognito mode. Problem solved. And don't say that most people don't know how to use these features. While true anyone, who is concerned about this is totally free to ask other people or even pay them to explain and solve the problem for them. The fact that they don't suggests to me that they don't care . Most of the whining about privacy is more the poster being upset that not enough other pe…

I'd like to point out that I came by the above insights after a conversation with my aunt (who is in her 40s), accompanied by a few other older relatives.

I do actually care but those statements were not a reflection of my cares, it was of theirs. While this is not equivalent to a comprehensive study of average computer using people across the world, they sure as heck cared but didn't even begin to know where to start, in contrast to what you are hoping will happen.

Re: Machine Learning Fairy Dust

#32

Post by j_baker »

I think this is usually a case of marketing having a bit too much say in product discussions. In the publishing industry, it seems like "My widget does X" doesn't get as strong a reaction from publishers as "My widget does X and it adapts to your readers".

The problem being (of course) that people forget how hard a problem machine learning can be.

Re: Machine Learning Fairy Dust

#33

Post by itrackmine »

droz wrote: post #21
the_cat_kittles wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you act on the internet like you would in real life, it doesn't seem like such a big deal. How is getting relevant ads a bad thing?

Couple years back, I spent a few weeks looking through different jewelry sites for a necklace for my girlfriend. During this time, I let my girlfriend borrow my laptop one night. Each site that she visited was riddled with ads for engagement rings. Next thing I know, she's giving me the twenty questions about why I'm looking at engagement rings. Some things need to be kept private even if they are benign.

Yea, that's going to continue to be the case until someone (cough us, cough) figures out that what you look at or buy on one occasion might not actually be something you're interested in. Specifically speaking of //items//, this is really a huge issue that is so huge that it's almost become laughable in the sense that nearly all the recommendations via "machine learning" (Collaborative Filtering, Trust Systems, etc) nowadays end up being so tainted that they are worthless - to you, and to the companies spitting them out. I call it "Recommendation Blindness" (copyright 2008...20% on usage...etc...etc..sue you..etc.....I'm just kidding of course).

Re: Machine Learning Fairy Dust

#34

Post by jackpirate »

makmanalp wrote: post #28
bluekeybox wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Banner advertisements will be replaced with much more terrifying 'targeted' ads Can someone please explain to me why ads for stuff I might actually be willing to buy (as opposed to hyper-annoying junk thrown at me every day) terrify so many people? Not that I am ambivalent to privacy issues; just playing devil's advocate here.

First, everyone assumed that no one knew knew about anything they did on the net. They thought that when they looked at an oven mitt in an online store, only they knew about it. The truth was that information was just unused by the store, and so the user never saw it. Gradually, this notion became slowly dispelled when stores actually started leveraging this information to provide, for example, suggestions. It's all…

The "low hanging fruit" argument is fascinating. Is there any more information about this somewhere?

Re: Machine Learning Fairy Dust

#35

Post by Groxx »

tincholio wrote: post #26
droz wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couple years back, I spent a few weeks looking through different jewelry sites for a necklace for my girlfriend. During this time, I let my girlfriend borrow my laptop one night. Each site that she visited was riddled with ads for engagement rings. Next thing I know, she's giving me the twenty questions about why I'm looking at engagement rings. Some things need to be kept private even if they are benign.

That's why the FSM gave us private browsing modes

And lo, the FSM didst claim it wasn't just for teh pronz. And the people did laugh. And wink. And nudge each other.

Until it was too late. Until your spam filter thought it wasn't spam. And on that day, the privacy geeks didth retort: "told ya so."

Post reply on HN