51–55 of 55 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calling people stupid isn't cool, it's unproductive overall and there is not place for it no matter how educated someone is this. Society is ill right now and maybe people are hoping artificial intelligence will take them to a better place?
He was talking about computers, not people.
Begin the human replacement procedure!
Look at Tesla with it's "autopilot" feature. It's not really a true autopilot, more just a driving assist, but people treat it like such. I think it's easy for people to fall into the trap of relying really hard on something that is shiny, new, and works well despite being imperfect - even if it is explicitly stated to be. Nano tech has a similar problem at hand. There are indications that nanoparticles could have se…
Then naming it autopilot is deceotive marketing at best. I love Elon as much as anyone else, but i find this marketing practice to be downright dangerous.
This is vastly overblown. People already vastlh distrust algorithms. Psychologists have studied it and called it "algorithmic bias". That when given a choice between computer and human, even when the computer makes much better predictions, people distrust it. In almost every domain where there is data and a simple prediction task, even really crude statistical methods outperform "experts". This has been known for dec…
Why do humans distrust "algorithms"? Maybe they had past experiences where algorithms behaved worse than humans? A recent example from recently: facebook replaced human-curated news with machine-curated, they started trending fake news [2]. Another example is algorithms that try to help you during automated phone calls, hence people always try to get to a human. This is because the speech-to-concept parsing/mapping i…
> Driverless vehicles have never been at fault, the study found: They’re usually hit from behind in slow-speed crashes by inattentive or aggressive humans unaccustomed to machine motorists that always follow the rules and proceed with caution.
Which completely negates the point you are trying to make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Release the algorithms! In fairness though, it sounds like the point you and others are often making is this. Humans are now considered dumb, bias and unreliable. So we need to invest in some kind of external policing system (AI) to run our world for us and make sure we're doing it right. Basically establish reliance on something external to ourselves? This is sad because it sounds like we're losing faith in ourselve…
Humans are just not good at doing certain kinds of tasks. We can add numbers, but nowhere near as fast as a computer can. Similarly we can see patterns in data, but not to the exact precision of a statistical model that has it's parameters optimally tuned with gradient descent and bayesian inference. Humans will never be as good as statistical algorithms at certain tasks and that's ok . I see fear about algorithms ev…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do humans distrust "algorithms"? Maybe they had past experiences where algorithms behaved worse than humans? A recent example from recently: facebook replaced human-curated news with machine-curated, they started trending fake news [2]. Another example is algorithms that try to help you during automated phone calls, hence people always try to get to a human. This is because the speech-to-concept parsing/mapping i…
From [1], > Driverless vehicles have never been at fault, the study found: They’re usually hit from behind in slow-speed crashes by inattentive or aggressive humans unaccustomed to machine motorists that always follow the rules and proceed with caution. Which completely negates the point you are trying to make.
The goal is to have the robot-driven car survive in a human world and perform in this world better than humans, not the other way around.