Natural Language Processing for State Security 132
Roland Piquepaille writes "Obviously, computers can't have an opinion. What computers are very good at, though, is scanning through text to deduct human opinions from factual information. This branch of natural-language processing (NLP) is called 'information extraction' and is used for sorting facts and opinions for Homeland Security. Right now, a consortium of three universities is for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) which doesn't have enough in-house expertise in NLP. Read more for additional references and a diagram showing how information extraction is used."
STFU (Score:1, Insightful)
! troll
Re: (Score:2)
That's the basis of our overreliance on technology in intelligence gathering all over the world. This torture stuff isn't going to help.
Re: (Score:1)
So what will separation of opinions from facts achieve?
Re: (Score:1)
It'll throw a very clear and unflattering light upon the doublethink and doublespeak of PoTUS (or at least, his speech-writers). For this reason, expect to see the subject dropped quietly as soon as the contradictions become undeniable. Awkward facts are meant to be dismissed as opinions, not taken seriously. Haven't you been reading you
tinfoil hat... or is it? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, because we need AT&T giving wide-scale, undocumented wiretaps to the NSA, who use voice recognition to generate transcripts of everyone's phone calls, and then DHS can run NLP on those transcripts to compile a list of "persons of interest", who are then automatically added to the TSA no-fly lists.
Yeah, I can envision the future, and the future sucks.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You want to know
Re: (Score:2)
RATE -> "incompetant political appointees" -2
RATE -> "support for the current adminsitration" +3
RATE -> "innocent people at GITMO" -5
RATE -> "public attention and review" -3
RATE -> "successful prosecutions" -3
RATE -> "perversions of justice" -4
TOTAL -> -14
SET WATCH -> rtb61
Ooooh another funding scramble! (Score:2)
Of course universities will be scrambling to help. Big dollars, imprecise goals..... and many of the professors would have done research in related fields.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me rephrase that with an example:
'I am ten years old' and 'I am twenty years old'. Which is fact, which is lie? Better yet: 'we believe Iraq has WMD' versus 'we beleive Iraq has no WMD'. No matter what algorythms or heuristics you throw at this, all a computer at mos
Re: (Score:2)
-Eric
Moo (Score:5, Funny)
.... is spell-checking.....
....something, apparently, the editors are not good at....
Re:Moo (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Yeah, but like the editors, computers also suck at grammar checking. What the fuck does that sentence even mean?
Yes, computers are great at spell checking (Score:3, Funny)
I have a spelling checker,
It came with my PC.
It plane lee marks four my revue
Miss steaks aye can knot sea.
Eye ran this poem threw it,
Your sure reel glad two no.
Its vary polished in it's weigh.
My checker tolled me sew.
Re: (Score:1)
Sigh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Not that I'm thrilled by these developments...
Re:Sigh. (Score:5, Insightful)
If they can flag based on what you said, I'm sure they can flag you based on the skin tone in the photo on your drivers license or passport too. Or by your just family history or name. Or where you live. Or where your parents live.
Anyways, odds are the computer won't be doing the flagging per se, it'll just be following the parameters and policies entered by those humans controlling it. I'm not sure they'd trust "national security" to a self-learning neural net without some sort of bias in it.
Bias (Score:2)
The point is to find relations between people that commit crimes so they can be caught red-handed TRYING to hijack a boeing, finding 20 armed policemen inside the plane instead of the innocent passengers they were expecting to kill.
If they're wrong. You cannot
Re: (Score:1)
Well, they can throw you in Gitmo for a few years or fly you to a Syrian prison to be tortured.
Re: (Score:2)
1) not an american
2) not an *xxx* (country where you were caught), nor have a valid residence permit
3) shooting at american soldiers
So if you're a Brit shooting American soldiers in Pakistan without any relation to the government there, then you might end up there. Otherwise, no.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm so glad none of that goes on in America today.
Re: (Score:1)
computer flagging??? (Score:1)
Number 891224 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'd like to request you use the phrase... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
State security, my ass! (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Alias-i's ThreatTracker (Score:5, Interesting)
No, I don't work for them, but their LingPipe toolkit has some cooooool stuff.
I missed the joke (Score:2)
really? (Score:2, Insightful)
I would say that comptuers (sic) aren't very good at deducting human opinions yet. They _may_ become better. Are humans good at deducting other humans opinion yet?
"Deduct"??? Where are all the nazis? It's deduce! (Score:2)
Apparently, everyone who actually knows English has now officially abandoned Slashdot. (Unless the lack of corrections is a sign that the
Re: (Score:2)
I resent your opinion that they're not, asshole!
One of the coolest/scariest things about the net.. (Score:2)
A really difficult problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Possible? Yes, given very narrow domains of discourse and lots of work.
All problems are difficult till solved (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can we have a competition for inane comments?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:A really difficult problem (Score:4, Interesting)
When used successfully over said "narrow domains", the human tendency (especially that set of humanity which makes the high-level choices for groups and organizations) will be to expand the domain in hopes of applying it to ever greater numbers of items.
Of course, as the search domain is expanded, the effectiveness of the results decline, with no warning to the clueless idiots driving the search. False positives eventually exceed true positives by greater and greater margins.
In the end, the strategy collapses, as a great many victims are shown to be wrongly targeted -- but until that point, the system does a LOT more harm than good.
Thank Goodness our leaders are such wise and contemplative souls that they would never, ever misuse such a tool.
A boon to research (Score:5, Interesting)
Look at the two project proposals below and imagine which one will have an easier time getting funding:
"An epistemological metaanalysis of object-subject interrelations and conflict avoidance in Beowulf"
or
"An epistemological metaanalysis of object-subject interrelations and conflict avoidance in Beowulf to better understand threats to NATIONAL SECURITY"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
DARPA, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, is a gigantic agency that funds a large proportion of academic research. The political hot button of child pornography, on the other hand, has no large funding source to offer universities. That's why so many academic projects have ties to defense.
Also, yes, usually research is, "do whatever you were going to do, but tie it to defense somehow." That's the way it goes, you need the cash. However, usually you can ti
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Well, no, in most places that is actually not the case. I have yet to work in any department where that country's military directly or indirectly is funding the research.
It may be somewhat department-dependent; you tend to seek grants from places where your lab has gotten grants before, and people know how to do a good application, know the ropes so to speak. So if you're working in a place where most money has
Re: (Score:2)
The spirit it was made in was more along the lines of, DARPA is interested in fundamental research that has objectives outside of the military. So, if autonomous vehicle research frequently has military ties, it's more the tie to the funding at work coloring this view than the research objectives. Autonomous vehicle work has obvious non-military applications.
When I said this, I was thinking very specifically in terms of, "we mak
Re: (Score:1)
Unfair? Decode? What, you think there is any actual meaning embedded in that string of words I put together?
Re: (Score:2)
Two Roland junk submissions in two days (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Let us filter this guy please. Seriously, I will stop subscribing and so will my usergroup if we can't filter out his faux science crap. It's getting near the end of the month Slashdot, do you, Roland
Man... (Score:2, Insightful)
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to prepare myself for my upcoming extraordinary rendition....
well (Score:2)
Sounds like GALE (Score:5, Interesting)
" The goal of the GALE (Global Autonomous Language Exploitation) program is to develop and apply computer software technologies to absorb, analyze and interpret huge volumes of speech and text in multiple languages, eliminating the need for linguists and analysts and automatically providing relevant, distilled actionable information to military command and personnel in a timely fashion. Automatic processing "engines" will convert and distill the data, delivering pertinent, consolidated information in easy-to-understand forms to military personnel and monolingual English-speaking analysts in response to direct or implicit requests."
Actually, it sounds more like ACE (Score:2)
GALE seems geared towards translation and aggregation of data for convenient
access by mono-lingual military and intelligence personnel. The goal of the
ACE project is to provide classification of data based on what it actually
means.
Re: (Score:2)
Executive Summary
Classication: Classified.
CRUSH! KILL! DESTROY!
End of report
abuse? (Score:3, Insightful)
DHS officer: Mr. 100%, I'm afraid we'll have to take you into custody. Our information extraction search on your blog concluded you are anti-American.
Me: From my blog? Is this about my criticism of the Iraq war?
DHS officer: Our results are classified, but please accompany us to GTMO for further "information extraction" to confirm the results of our investigation...
Ok, I know I'm taking a very cynical view here and that's pretty full of FUD, but why else does State security need this? Is this for them to monitor every chat room and blog?
Re: (Score:2)
DHS is a long way from tuning this to be feasible for less stylistically precise, more casually-formulated forms of writing, e.g., lots of blogs, most email, nearly all IMs and chat rooms -- especially the latter three because th
Wow! (Score:1, Funny)
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo... (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo (Score:1)
Aha! (Score:3, Funny)
Welcome the new opinion-based CAPTCHA-s!
Re: (Score:2)
-- Fox News
NLP (Score:2)
This could be a double edge sword for the government. What if it falls in the wrong hands? People all over could use the technology on the news to extract the real information, and realize that things are not what they seem.
Of course, I suppose that what they would probably
So, essentially... (Score:1)
Can do or will do? (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny, because neither of the articles state that. In fact, they don't even say that software can do that at all yet: A new research program
So yeah, it would be nice if they could sort opinions from facts. Why they're at it, why don't they just recognize lies from truth too, because wouldn't that be doing the exact same thing? Then we can just run statements made by people suspected of committing a crime through the software, which can then sort out all the facts from the opinions, and we'll no longer need judges, juries or attorneys.
Roland, next time save yourself some time and just make the whole freaking thing up from scratch.
Dan East
Re: (Score:1)
Roland, learn some fucking computer science and quit your stupid anthropomorphisizing and out-of-ass expression of your "opinions". Do you have a credit card? Well guess what, a neural network formed an "opinion" that you should be allowed one. Not by NLP, but by pattern detection -- something that we humans evolved to do and are still the best at, for now.
Re: (Score:2)
If Roland had only mentioned the words semantic web, we'd have lots of posts about how it's all hype and vapor instead of posts about how the government can't be trusted with this. That's the power of language.
Re: (Score:1)
one thing (Score:2, Funny)
screw national security (Score:3, Interesting)
Too Smart (Score:2)
If one of these NLP "expert" systems can extract fact or opinion from that sentence, we should delete it.
Start writing long run-on sentences with big words (Score:2)
Who Thinks this is Reasonable? (Score:2)
The 4th amendment says:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or thi
NSA NLP FUBAR (Score:1)
I wonder how long before we have to pledge allegiance to the NSA to support their war on terrorism?
Hmmm, someone at the front door at this late hour. Be right bac...%&$...no carrier.....
The impossible just takes more tax dollars (Score:1, Funny)
Piquepaille:troll or editor alias? (Score:2)
A Multilingual approach - see also (Score:1)
Bushed (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
-
What computers are good at... (Score:2)
Nope. Computers are good at processing data that has been formatted in a way that they can interpret and running that data through algorithms to come up with some sort of result. They're also good at making grilled cheese sandwiches.
Re: (Score:1)
Computers did gave opinion.. didn't they? (Score:1)
Often, on Windows, there always been 'opinion' given by the system, at least to say that your system is not secure by turning off Windows XP SP2 Firewall.. Does
Test Database Candidate (Score:1)
eg. "Our goal, and our mission, is to help Lebanese citizens and Lebanese businesses not only recover, but to flourish, because we believe strongly in the concept of a democracy in Lebanon."
I really dread reading the newspaper anymore. One morning I'm going find that someone has come out four-square for the concept of a democracy in the U.S.A.
This is incredibly useful and worthwhile research, but I fear it would be totally lost on DHS if it were left in their hands. Just the second
Information extraction (Score:2, Informative)
MODPARENT UP (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Really? How is it informative when the same, single article has the following associated tags: "Yes", "No", "Maybe", "duh"
Re: (Score:1)
Good point - if it has all of them at once, it's probably a waste of time. Although it could be a good indicator of whether this is a hotly debated topic, or possibly just a load of crap not worth reading (OK, a waste of time as first stated).
Re: (Score:2)
> Good point - if it has all of them at once, it's probably a waste of time. Although it could be a good indicator of whether this is a hotly debated topic, or possibly just a load of crap not worth reading (OK, a waste of time as first stated).
I understand the sentiment to want to vote on an article, but that's a different mechanism.
If slashdot wants to implement a "Vote on
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you haven't been relying on those "Yes" or "No" tags to tell you if a story is right or wrong. The point of the tag system is to give you a link of all stories associated with a given tag, not to see what tags are associated with a given story. You're supposed to click on the tags, not read them.
The tag system must by design incorporate a mix of useful and useless tags because any
Re: (Score:2)
Whatever the orignal intention, users have noticed that if enough of them use a particular tag, it is displayed under the articles. Thus it's become a way to respond directly to it. It does show, I think, that users want a way to rate articles directly, and have leapt on this as a way to do so.
Anyway, I've not seen any other use for tags yet, so w
Re: (Score:2)