An interesting article on the role of humans in supposedly machine analysis of data.
Why don't the high tech companies admit that their automated data gathering and analysis routines still have to fall back on humans?
[bbc.com]
I actually attended a Ted-talk style lecture on this last week. He talked about how, if the algorithm is created by (biased) people, and (biased) people decide how well the algorithm is working, and the data fed into the algorithm is biased, then it’s inevitable that the results are biased.
In other words, the "GIGO" statement from my computer days of 40 years ago.
( Garbage In - Garbage Out )
@Petter I think he actually used that exact phrase!
@A2Jennifer "When you enter garbage into a computer you get garbage out. However, that garbage, having passed through an expensive machine, is somehow enobled and acquires a high status."
That was a comment I heard 40 years ago, and I think is still valid.
I think it sounds like ego and protecting the brand. Data has to be interpreted and checked by a sentient being at some point and computers and robots aren’t there yet.
Computer assistance can be very useful, as in pointing out where to look. So much information is unremarkable, interesting anomalies can go overlooked.
AI is really still in its infancy. Game theory & statistically based algorithms still require "hoomans" to program and interpret run results. I get at least 2 requests a month to return to the "world of work" in this field from DoD, USAF, & "Other Government Agencies". And my expertise (what little there was of it) is over 6 years old. In this field, completely outdated.