561–570 of 639 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is way overthinking it. The search engines aren't semantically analyzing the images. They are just matching nearby text.
I agree the parent is overthinking it, but that's underthinking it. It's been a long time since search engines were mere text matchers.
Nobody would describe a plain shirt as a shirt without stripes unless it’s within that context.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point of the OP is that they claim they understand everything. Example: https://www.blog.google/products/search/search-language-unde...
Why do people make false claims while linking directly to a primary sources that unequivocally and repeatedly contradicts their claim? > 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 former returns lots of mixed race couples, mostly not white couples. However the latter returns black couples.
What is going on here? Similar phenomenon perhaps?
I have noticed in the past few years google results have become noticeable worse for similar reasons. Google used to _surprise_ me with how good it was able to understand what I was really looking for even when I put in vague terms. I remember being shocked on several occasions when putting in half remembered sentences, lyrics, expressions from something I had heard years ago and it being the first! result. I almost…
Google has gotten worse for me BECAUSE of the stuff you're talking about: It used to search everything and find the words that I cared about. Today, it will silently guess at what I want, and rewrite the query. If they have indexed pages that contain the words I put in, but don't meet their freshness/recency/goodness criteria, they will return OTHER pages with content that contains vaguely related words. "Oh, he coul…
I still continue to use it though since as some here have already mentioned Google's results because worse a few years ago and DDG was lean and good enough to switch. I do hope they'd consider more such feedback.
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.
Many interpreted this along tribal lines, but likely it is that there is constant tuning and lots of complex constraints.
[1] not to say that you implied the reason was racism, but often it is attributed to something along those lines
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone else said you don't know that's wrong for what Amazon are optimising. If they find people [with your background profile] who buy shirts are susceptible to buying sweatpants, they might also find that if the seed you with "sweatpants" as an idea up front that the repeated presentation of sweatpants in "people who bought X also bought Y" sections is more effective. That's the sort of thing I'd expect Amazon…
Like, when was the last time this was considered ideal? “Yes, I would like an unstriped dress shirt please” “How about this striped shirt?” “No thank you, I would like an unstriped dress shirt please” “I have some lovely jogging pants” “Ok, I need to be clear here, I would like a dress shirt that has no stripes” “Can I interest you in a white undershirt? People who buy dress shirts usually buy undershirts” ....
T: I think pink would look good on you, and it's very fashionable right now.
You: Just bring me some yellow shirts to try.
T: Oh, I got these, and brought this pink one anyway; try it!
But, of course Google isn't making fashion suggestions. But then, ... the tailor might also be just trying to shift excess stock or be on a bonus for selling that particular high-cost shirt.
Achilles: Who could deny it?
Tortoise: Good. Likewise, “Cast-iron sinks” is a valid utterance, isn’t it?
Achilles: Indubitably.
Tortoise: Then, putting them together, we get “Politicians lie in cast iron sinks”. Now that’s not the case, is it?
---- Douglas Hofstadter, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid. Basic Books, 1979