491–500 of 639 posts
Noticed something interesting, if you search for 'shirt without sleeves' in google images, you DO get sleeveless shirts. So why doesn't this work with stripes?
But there probably aren’t many images labelled as stripeless.
I’m not sure why BERT doesn’t try shirt -stripes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
animalCrax0rx is in the business of producing quick pithy posts to earn more karma while keeping understanding low and making claims that are not evidence based... See how that works? That's not really what's going on. Sure, G. is incentivized to include pages quickly, but they are also incentivized to produce them accurately, and as the above poster indicates, this is quite a hard problem to solve generally. A is al…
Your ad hominem on the other poster is unnecessary, violates the HN guidelines and not an apt comparison. Pointing out the obvious: Google is an advertising company. If the cost of producing an accurate result outweighs the advertising income on a given term, there is no incentive for Google to produce better results.
Having a search engine that people go to whenever they want to search for things is incredibly valuable, because they will come to you when they want to buy things and you can sell ads. But unless you consistently give the best results for all queries, people will go whenever does. It's worth investing strongly in all queries, not just highly monetizable ones.
(Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google was good at launch because it was harvesting data from webrings and directories to provide it "high quality" link ranking data. However, they didn't thank or credit or share any of their revenue with the sites whose human curation helped their results become so impressive. Seeing that Google search was effective, most human curators stopped curating directories and webrings. The SEO industry picked up the slac…
> Google has not yet discovered how to automate "is this a quality link?" Google has so much more data than just the keywords and searches people make, it seems like this should be a problem they could solve. Through tracking cookies (e.g. Google Analytics) they should be able to follow a single user's session from start to finish, and they also should be able to 'rank' users in some vague way where they'd learn whic…
They already do this today for any venue where they can link “traffic volume” to “ranking increase without human review”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the problem is not really that Google search was not understanding the meaning of the search term (...) Rather, it was a bit confused about what you are really searching for here. Maybe a comparison of shirts with and without stripes? In this very specific case I don't buy it. Sure, it probably applies for other queries, but if you approach a salesperson and ask him for "shirts without stripes" it's pretty clear wh…
Agreed, it's not that weird of a search. Other, similar queries like "shirt without buttons/collar/pocket" seem to work just fine. The only difference is that those are all physical properties of a shirt while stripes is a type of pattern.
shirt without buttons - preety much fail.
shirt without red button - as already expected, shirts with red buttons
Why should it not be possible to solve this with statistical methods? The model just needs to be able to understand the important meaning of "no" in here, in the context of the whole sentence. I would guess that most modern NNs from the NLP area (Transformer or LSTM) would be able to correctly differentiate the meaning. The problem is, I think there is no fancy NN (yet) behind Google search, and the other web searche…
The OP most likely isn't up to date on latest NN architectures which can learn from the ordering of words. Statistical methods ML, not anymore in NLP.
This problem is known as "attribution" - you have a "no" or "without" in the sentence, but you don't know where it belongs. One could (and one does) argue that the problem cannot be solved with statistical methods (ML), especially not in any domain where accuracy is required, such as medical recored analysis: "no evidence of cancer" and "evidence of no cancer" are very different things. Zooming out, the language fiel…
The point of the OP is that they claim they understand everything. Example: https://www.blog.google/products/search/search-language-unde...
> sometimes still don’t quite get it right,
> Even with BERT, we don’t always get it right.
And nothing in the blog is about image search.
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.
At least this is relatively innocuous. Until recently if you did a Google Image Search for "person" or "people", it only showed white men.
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.
At least this is relatively innocuous. Until recently if you did a Google Image Search for "person" or "people", it only showed white men.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great question, but with potentially nonintuitive results. A sales gimmick furniture store would use in the past was to offer customers a free gallon on ice cream for visiting the store. The value was to the store offering the promotion, as shoppers would be drawn to the "free" gift, but on receiving the ice cream -- too much to eat directly. -- would then have to go home to put the dessert in the freezer. And have l…
That's a fascinating story, thank you. Still I insist that business serving up more relevant search results for loosely phrased queries will make more money than the one relying on the user to formulate perfect queries. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
See Scott Adams, "Confusopoly" (2011): https://www.scottadamssays.com/2011/12/07/online-confusopoly...
I've touched on this: https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/243in1/privacy...
The antipattern is sufficiently widely adopted that I've been. looking for possible dark-pattern justifications.