Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Much of what’s being sold as "AI" today is snake oil. It does not and cannot work. In a talk at MIT yesterday, I described why this happening, how we can recognize flawed AI claims, and push back. Here are my annotated slides: https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~arvindn/talks/MIT-STS-AI-snakeoil.pdf …pic.twitter.com/pmOTI3vq8p
Key point #1: AI is an umbrella term for a set of loosely related technologies. *Some* of those technologies have made genuine, remarkable, and widely-publicized progress recently. But companies exploit public confusion by slapping the “AI” label on whatever they’re selling.
Key point #2: Many dubious applications of AI involve predicting social outcomes: who will succeed at a job, which kids will drop out, etc. We can’t predict the future — that should be common sense. But we seem to have decided to suspend common sense when “AI” is involved.
There’s evidence from many domains, including prediction of criminal risk, that machine learning using hundreds of features is only slightly more accurate than random, and no more accurate than simple linear regression with three or four features—basically a manual scoring rule.
Key point #3: transparent, manual scoring rules for risk prediction can be a good thing! Traffic violators get points on their licenses and those who accumulate too many points are deemed too risky to drive. In contrast, using “AI” to suspend people’s licenses would be dystopian.pic.twitter.com/05gJHwckZi
The best part of the event was the panel discussion with @histoftech, @STurkle, @edenmedina, and the audience. Thanks to @crystaljjlee for the excellent summary!https://twitter.com/crystaljjlee/status/1196611062126317576 …
THREAD: Tonight, there was a great panel discussion Thank you for sharing this.
I love this - great work.
It's genuinely frustrated to see peddlers of snake oil featured on TV, at the UN, at conferences ... Need I go on
Indeed
The 3-4 variable rule holds up pretty well for credit too. The slide below is about a traditional credit history scoring model. (Additional, fancy data sources didn't change this much at all.)pic.twitter.com/uCbKcTyy7M
Very interesting insights. So we are essentially moving from KISS (keep it simple stupid) to slapping AI to all credit scoring for the sake of sophistication?
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
