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

Shirt Without Stripes

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–639 of 639 posts

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#631

Post by ryaan_anthony »

jedberg wrote: post #390
bartread wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't quite believe your comment when I read it so I did a Google image search for "person" and the results weren't a lot better than you'd suggested. Mostly white men, a few white women, a very few black women, a handful of Asians, and multiple instances of Terry Crews. The net result of that Google search, combined with the "Shirt Without Stripes" repo, leaves me even more unimpressed with the capabilities of…

If you really want to be disappointed, search for [doctor] and [nurse]. Unless things have really changed, [doctor] will be mostly white men and [nurse] will be mostly white and Filipino women. But don't blame the AI. The AI has no morality. It simply reflects and amplifies the morality of the data it was given. And in this case the data is the entirety of human knowledge that Google knows about. So really you can't…

What does the color of people's skin in search results have to do with morality? I was raised not to see color, now we have this "progressive" movement hell bent on manipulating search results to disproportionately represent minorities. If you want to filter your search results based on the color of skin you can do that easily.

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#632

Post by belorn »

tomhoward wrote: post #627
belorn wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I thought about words people use in priming studies, usually in order to trigger a behavior, and just typed the word with space and "person" appended. I did use images.google.se in order to tell google which country I wanted my bias from since that is the culture and demographics I am most familiar with. I also only looked at photos of a person and ignored emojis. I have also seen here on HN links to websites th…

You really should link to screenshots of your results so people can judge for themselves. I just submitted all your searches to google.com from Australia, and the results were nothing like what you described; all the results were very diverse. This is to be expected, as Google has been criticised for years for reinforcing stereotypes in image search results, and has gone to great effort to adjust the algorithms to re…

I usually don't spend time producing evidence since no one else does it, nor did the parent comment, or you for that matter. It also tend to derail discussions onto details and arguments over word definitions.

But here, not that I think it will help: https://www.recompile.se/~belorn/happyvscriminal.png

First is happy person. Out of 20 we have 14 women, 4 guys, 2 children.

Second is criminal person. The contrast to the first image should be obvious enough that I don't need to type it.

If I type in "person" only I get the following persons in the first row in following order: Pierre Person (male) Greta Thunberg (female) Greta Thunberg (female) Unnamed man (male) Unnamed woman (female) Mark zuckerberg (male) Keanu Reeves (male) Greta Thunberg (female) Trump (male) Read Terry (male) Unnamed man (male) Greta Thunberg (female) Greta Thunberg (female) Unnamed woman (female) Unnamed woman (female)

Resulting in 8 pictures of females, 8 males, which I must say is very balanced (I don't care to take a screenshot, format and upload, so if you don't trust the result then don't).

Typing in doctor as someone suggested in a other thread I get in order (f=female, m=male): fffmffmmmmfmmfffmfmfmmmff

and Nurse: fffmffmfmmffmffmfffmffmffff

Interestingly the first 5 images have the same order of gender and are both primarily female, through doctor tend to equalize a bit more later while nurse tend to remain a bit more female dominated.

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#633

Post by glup »

jldugger wrote: post #525
glup wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a postdoc in computational linguistics, my go-to example for talks is asking Siri not to show me the weather.

... Siri doesn't show you the weather by default. I know your point is about shallow parsing, but there's a reason it still kinda works.

For "Hey Siri, don't show me the weather!" I get "Here's the forecast for today"

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#634

Post by tomhoward »

belorn wrote: post #632
tomhoward wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really should link to screenshots of your results so people can judge for themselves. I just submitted all your searches to google.com from Australia, and the results were nothing like what you described; all the results were very diverse. This is to be expected, as Google has been criticised for years for reinforcing stereotypes in image search results, and has gone to great effort to adjust the algorithms to re…

I usually don't spend time producing evidence since no one else does it, nor did the parent comment, or you for that matter. It also tend to derail discussions onto details and arguments over word definitions. But here, not that I think it will help: https://www.recompile.se/~belorn/happyvscriminal.png First is happy person. Out of 20 we have 14 women, 4 guys, 2 children. Second is criminal person. The contrast to th…

Thanks for the screenshot. It helps (and by the way, yes the onus is on you to provide evidence as you're the one making the original claim).

Your initial comment said "Happy person", women of color.

But your screenshot showed several white people, several men, and a diversity of ages. Yes, more women, which is probably reflective of the frequency of photos with that search term/description in stock photo libraries and articles/blog posts featuring them. No big deal.

You also said "Criminal person", Hispanic men

But the screenshot contains more photos of India's prime minister than it does of Hispanic men. In fact I can't see any obviously-Hispanic men, and the biggest category in that set seems to be white men (though some are ambiguous).

The doctor and nurse searches suggest Google is making some effort to de-bias the results against the stereotype.

To me the biggest takeaway is that image search results still aren't very good at all, for generic searches like this.

Indeed it's likely that they can't be, as it's so hard to discern the user's true intent (for something as broad as "happy person"), compared to something more specific like "roger federer" or "eiffel tower".

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#635

Post by jldugger »

glup wrote: post #633
jldugger wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... Siri doesn't show you the weather by default. I know your point is about shallow parsing, but there's a reason it still kinda works.

For "Hey Siri, don't show me the weather!" I get "Here's the forecast for today"

Exactly. But it was already not showing you the weather before you said anything. The query stymies shallow parses NLP assistants do, but isn't one you would actually give in real life.

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#636

Post by Chris2048 »

reubenmorais wrote: post #556
danielscrubs wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of the confusion with negatives and languages: -Vill du inte ha glass? [Don't you want ice cream?] -はい [Yes] Does she want ice cream? Answer: No, she doesn't. I added a not, so she's reversing the answer as Japanese people do. The number of times I've been dumbstruck by this is larger than I'd like to admit, and I'm a coder.

English has similar confusion even for plain, non negated questions. Q: "Do you mind if I sit here?" A1: "Not at all!" A2: "Sure!" Both are valid answers and mean the same thing, the person asking is welcome to sit there. This has always amused me.

I'm not sure I understand, "mind" means "object to", so they are asking "Do you [object to] me sitting here?";

"Not at all" == "I do Not [object to you sitting here] at all"

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#637

Post by thw0rted »

ghayes wrote: post #547
zaat wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shirt without paisley - fails shirt without buttons - preety much fail. shirt without red button - as already expected, shirts with red buttons

To be fair, the first and last query would also confuse me if someone asked me for that item. "Shirt without paisley" feels a bit like "cereal without elephants." You don't usually explicitly exclude an element that is relatively uncommon.

It's not just the way this is phrased, it's that there is no English-language formulation that works at all. Swap "shirt" for "tie", because paisley is quite common on ties. Now, try:

* tie without paisley * tie not paisley * non-paisley ties * ties that aren't paisley * ties other than paisley

You guessed it, in each case, at least half of the results are paisley ties. The only way to actually get what you want -- the set described by X, minus the set described by Y -- is to use the exclusion operator in the search, "ties -paisley".

This is great, and makes intuitive sense to somebody with multiple computer science degrees. But not only is it hard to explain to an outsider, it's actually quite hard to get them to think in a way that accommodates this capability, that is, in terms of set theory.

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#638

Post by liveoneggs »

wyattpeak wrote: post #507
lonelappde wrote: post #490

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.

now they are product matchers

Re: Shirt Without Stripes

#639

Post by raindropm »

Apparently, this kinda works in Thai language too(and I think other language also) The search keyword is "เสื้อไม่มีแถบ" which is literally translated as 'Shirt without stripes'. It's common words to speak, unlike 'without' in English.

The result, of course, show shirt with some kind of stripe, albeit not prominent like the English one.

Post reply on HN