Personally, I'm rooting for a Sanders/Warren ticket. It's farther left than might be safe, but I don't think anyone the republicans have are any good this cycle, so I think it could work out.

Is that you, apk?

Exactly - a meritocracy would be great, if it existed. But instead it's a bunch of relatively well-off white guys looking around at their buddies, saying "Yep! We sure are all the best, that's why it's just people like me here. If a group is underrepresented, it's definitely because they're bad at tech - this is a meritocracy, after all!"

It's a self-perpetuating feel-good lie.

Thanks :) It got flipped back to insightful at some point, at least.

It's called an "apology" - did you skip that day in kindergarten?

Woah bud, calm down. You weren't on this development team, were you?

But the people writing the algorithm and choosing the input data *can* be racist. And even in the absence of malice, you can create racist outcomes.

If your training set has many photos of white people and few photos of black people, it's not going to be great at recognizing black people. If it doesn't know what black people look like, it's bound to misclassify them more often than white people.

Anecdotally, I noticed that the Microsoft "how old are you" site a while back recognized me (a white person) in every picture, but only detected my (black) partner in about a third of the pictures I fed it. In one instance, in a screenshot of a video chat, it recognized my little 100x100 picture in the bottom right, but failed to detect my partner's face in the center.

Your real-world performance can only be as good as your test/training data.

There really oughta be a rule banning all these unjustified rules.

See, you'd know that if you'd gone to college.

When the cost of everything is going up (the value of the dollar is going down), that's inflation.

When the cost of one specific thing is going up - that's not inflation.

I'd much rather have healthy people than a healthy market.

They didn't get the channel. They just got the shorthand URL - https://www.youtube.com/user/l... still goes to his channel, he still has all his followers, etc. This is just redirection of the shorthand URL https://www.youtube.com/lush/ to Lush Cosmetic's channel.

Probably their algorithm, like most of Google's stuff, is based on usage - they saw that people frequently visited /lush/; then went to the channel for Lush Cosmetics afterwards.

If you're interested in reading a bit more of her rationale, she posted her announcement on her tumblr page, here: http://taylorswift.tumblr.com/...

Are you talking about Martha Stewart? Because that's all I found on google - well, that and your comment.

Your G+ avatar is awful, by the way - you should really shave that facial hair..

This was my first thought too. Forget the privacy concerns, how much money are they wasting?