I’ve not been closely following AI development for a while, so I’m just guessing that what’s now called “deep learning” is really just old-school neural networks with a spiffy new coat of marketing paint. Yes? If so, it’s not surprising that the developers don’t know precisely how it does what it does. They know how a neural net works, but not how it gets a particular output given a set of inputs. The big issue here is that a neural net only knows how to handle situations or cases that were “spanned” by the information that went into its training. That is, it can only deal with things that were covered by the training information. For example, if a car AI never “saw” a situation where an airplane was landing on the road in front of it, the AI might well not know what to do.
All the developers can do about this is make sure that the training set doesn’t have any serious gaps in it as far as situations the neural net will need to be able to handle. This is not as easy as it sounds, and how well it is done will be the basis for any lawsuits that arise from a misbehaving neural-net-based AI.
No.. What we have here, other than a failure to communicate, is a budget that simply represents what the average American wants.
To clarify, what we have here represents what the average American who voted in states Trump won in the Electoral College want. If you don't like what he's doing, and you didn't vote, then what the hell were you doing that was more important than voting???!!!
Dealing with this problem that the news most people get these days hasn’t been carefully vetted as it was (or at least they tried) back in the days of Uncle Walter Cronkite is important. The Internet, with it’s ability to spread unfounded rumor at a wildfire pace, has broken America. I’m not talking about this current election, this has been going on for some time now. The question comes down to how does an organization like Facebook help keep down the levels of total bullshit without censorship problems. And I’m talking both sides of the political spectrum here. One way might be to take on a vetting responsibility in which bullshit posts aren’t removed but are edited by adding a statement something along the lines of “this statement is the most puro of bullshit” along with a link to something like Snopes where the issue is explained.
This won’t fix this problem, but it might help people see that there’s more to a story than what their good buddies or BFFs are posting on Facebook. And no, it’s not perfect, but it’s also not censorship. You can post whatever nonsense you feel like, but the owner of the site has the right AND THE OBLIGATION to watch for and flag nonsense. It would be nice if everyone had a working bullshitometer, but the newer models of People seem to have dropped that module.
FORTUNE'S FUN FACTS TO KNOW AND TELL: A giant panda bear is really a member of the racoon family.