Sounds like this is a good job candidate filtering tool, meaning it's easier to do the job when you have more data to build models and "innovate" in this field, but it takes real genius to provide similar if not equal or superior services when you have access to less information. Filter out the people who can't do their jobs without the easy (comprehensive) information and you'll have the people who are really going to shake things up with access only to privacy respecting data, because that's where the talent is required and that's where genius will be found.
Essentially all of modern AI uses statistical learning which recognizes patterns in large amounts of data. This does not seem to be some fad either - biological neural networks are also trained with huge amounts of data: our brains don't learn from singular experiences but thousands.
Giving this up would mean to go back to primitive expert systems and language understanding systems that analyze natural language, for example, by trying to parse some universal grammar structure. These systems have never worked remotely as well as statistical NLP models.
Moreover, the ability to train ML models is not continuous in the amount data available - when you have only 10% of data available then your model might not even perform 10% as well as the competition but is possibly completely useless since it cannot be trained with available data.
Asking young researchers to do ML without access to big data is a bit like asking a particle physics researcher to test the standard model with the equipment in some basement lab instead of going to CERN.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie
Here's the thing. ALL search engines suck at the moment and have ZERO intelligence to them.
A real AI search engine would use natural language queries to search.
How come I can't do a search for "How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?" (don't ask but essentially cheap friends buying cheap equipment and going the cheap route to get it fixed) and not get a bunch of videos for a Samsung Galaxy 4?
When I do this search I come up with 2 videos and several How-to guides. What else do you want?
Modern search engines are in fact amazing compared to anything that was available even 15 years ago when such information had to be hunted down in some obscure hobbyist magazines (if at all).
Apple can use as much of my personal data as they want--so long as it stays on my phone!
I’m still left wondering how much space would be taken up by local Siri software to do the processing on-device. And why we don’t have local Siri on Macs, where such restrictions are less... well, Apple’s making them more important these days.
I’m still left wondering how much space would be taken up by local Siri software to do the processing on-device. And why we don’t have local Siri on Macs, where such restrictions are less... well, Apple’s making them more important these days.
I wouldn't think the storage space or the processing capabilities are feasible to hold Siri on a Mac. What I would like to see is a more intelligent front-end, at least as an option, especially for iOS, where I can ask about a contact to be called which would then determine if this needs Siri (from Apple's servers) or just the same local, but simple system, albeit updated, that existed before Siri arrived. As it stands now it has to be one of the other, so even if you have no network access it won't be able to do something like the voice control for music of yore, which I think was faster before Siri, at least initially. (Note: I can't confirm that as accurate as I never measured it with a stopwatch)
When I do this search I come up with 2 videos and several How-to guides. What else do you want?
Modern search engines are in fact amazing compared to anything that was available even 15 years ago when such information had to be hunted down in some obscure hobbyist magazines (if at all).
NO you don't. You get a video that doesn't work, you also get a video to replace the LCD not the glass.
I can never find exactly what I am wanting whether I use quotes or not. What I want is something that can actually understand the context of
How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?
Search engines look for words and not context simply because computers are too dumb to understand context. They simply don't have the processing power to understand it.
The problem with search engines is that they rely on keywords and tags which not everyone is willing to fill in so right away they are a flawed concept.
Apple should let users OPT IN to share their data if they want to. I would be happy to share data with Apple to improve their products as long as it was clear that I CHOSE to participate.
OPT IN vs OPT OUT huge difference...
IIRC, you are asked to opt in when you first set up an iOS device.
If you don't understand why they need this data, then perhaps it isn't them that aren't too bright.
There is general purpose AI, and there is AI that is more personally oriented. I had an assistant in my company. She knew about much of what I needed to do, and she would take care of a lot of things that I didn't have time for, as well as reminding me of appointments, and other matters that required my attention. If she didn't know all about my needs, based on what I knew, and did, then she wouldn't have been very useful. The same is true of Siri and the rest of these "assistants". The more they know of what you know, and do, the more helpful they will be.
I've read a few articles that stated, correctly, that Apple will never have a personal assistant as useful as Google Now and Cortana because most personal data is out of bounds for them. And yes, that is correct. It's a matter of priorities.
So trying to hire an expert in these matters for personal assistants, and then telling them that most personal data is off bounds, is discouraging, and they may decide to stay away.
I believe that Apple should do what it's doing with health data. Keep it private, but allow the user to decide if a specific usage model is ok for some data to be released to it, such as the medical studies which seem to be increasingly popular in iOS. So, people should be asked if they want to participate in Apple's AI research by allowing specific data to be used for that purpose, with the proviso that people can shut the tap to that data at any time, and that the data will never leave Apple's labs. That could solve many of these requitment problems, and with the hundreds of millions of people around the world using iOS devices, enough would choose to participate in this for it to be useful.
I think it's a matter of time. Once you have a home server that aggregates those years of data about you, instead of "in the cloud", this whole debate disappears. Siri hosted on an Apple Home Server would solve the privacy and security issue.
Here's the thing. ALL search engines suck at the moment and have ZERO intelligence to them.
A real AI search engine would use natural language queries to search.
How come I can't do a search for "How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?" (don't ask but essentially cheap friends buying cheap equipment and going the cheap route to get it fixed) and not get a bunch of videos for a Samsung Galaxy 4? I'll tell you why it's because a search engine query actually looks like this:
This will give me a search for every word not the entire phrase. I cannot be the only person on the planet to want to have searched that exact phrase so straight away the search engine's lack of intelligence comes to light.
Oh and don't give me that whole use quotes or set to search phrase because it still gives me the crap results I get with the boolean search.
If Apple can crack natural language queries then not only will they be onto a winner but they will CRUSH Google and Google will never recover.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie
NO you don't. You get a video that doesn't work, you also get a video to replace the LCD not the glass.
I can never find exactly what I am wanting whether I use quotes or not. What I want is something that can actually understand the context of
How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?
Search engines look for words and not context simply because computers are too dumb to understand context. They simply don't have the processing power to understand it.
The problem with search engines is that they rely on keywords and tags which not everyone is willing to fill in so right away they are a flawed concept.
Search engines extract keywords and tags automatically from natural language queries and websites. There is no need to fill anything by anyone - otherwise search engines would be pretty useless.
They then extract context by matching these keywords to data repositories. For example, a search engine can learn that "Britney Spears" is a singer by looking for Wikipedia articles that mention her. This is very similar to how people understand context - all the processing power in the world will not allow you to make a connection between "Britney Spears" and "singer" unless you have enough data to learn from.
Finally about your query: Not sure what search engine you are using but the 4th entry on Google (using exactly your query) directs to a lengthy discussion about just replacing the glass - and that this seems impossible. Modern smartphones have the digitizer fused with the glass and hence it is next to impossible to just replace the glass.
No search engine can point you to an article or a solution that doesn't exist.
Bingo. It's a false dichotomy. In the pre-Google world, AI meant machine intelligence, machine learning, and natural language parsing. In the Google world, AI now means creepy data collection about human test subjects? Are we building HAL9000 or f-ing SkyNet, An Alphabet subsidiary?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
It's because no one yet knows how to do real, thinking, AI, so they are trying to put lipstick on a search engine. And search engines need big DBs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jameskatt2
I would rather have Apple kill Siri than lose privacy.
If AI experts need private data, then they aren't that bright to begin with.
Just playing devil's advocate here, but wouldn't "machine learning" include my "private" data? Couldn't access be granted to such data if only temporarily? And if it's temporary, how, then, does the machine "learn" and how does it "remember" and what does it use as it's "memories"? I'm not a PHD in AI, so these may be dumb questions, I'm just genuinely curious, and, of course, I don't expect you to have all the answers either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
This is silly. All companies have to do is ask when they want your data and tell you exactly what they're doing with it. I personally have zero concerns that Apple will improperly use my data so I have no problem sharing it with them if it ultimately makes for a better user experience.
Which is basically what happens now, to varying extents afaict. I haven't memorized the Siri Privacy Statement, but I'm guessing it encapsulates this in essence. It would become pretty annoying pretty quick to have to "confirm or deny" every time I wanted to ask Siri to do something
Just playing devil's advocate here, but wouldn't "machine learning" include my "private" data? Couldn't access be granted to such data if only temporarily? And if it's temporary, how, then, does the machine "learn" and how does it "remember" and what does it use as it's "memories"? I'm not a PHD in AI, so these may be dumb questions, I'm just genuinely curious, and, of course, I don't expect you to have all the answers either.
My understanding (from watching the WWDC presentations earlier in the year) is that Siri will indeed index/learn from your private data, but it will build it's knowledge database locally, on your phone. This is in contrast to putting the database on their servers (which is what other companies do).
This was the middle ground Apple found between not indexing your data at all (which would make Siri less useful) and protecting your privacy to some degree.
Apple should let users OPT IN to share their data if they want to. I would be happy to share data with Apple to improve their products as long as it was clear that I CHOSE to participate.
OPT IN vs OPT OUT huge difference...
Actually that's a terrible idea. Apple's main draw is even they can't access the info as it's gone or encrypted even from them. Break that barrier and gov't subpoenas will be flying left and right and Apple will have no defense against providing the data.
... "The vast improvements in user experience far, far outweigh the potential security risks to private information."
I strong;y disagree -- I suspect that Edward Snowden was at some point convinced (maybe still is) that dumping all the intelligence data he had for the world (ALL) to see made the world a safer place. I just don't buy that something that is supposed to be so secure can be walked off with, in front of combined US military intelligence (oxymoron) and other so-called intelligence agencies with the US. It has been proven many times the all it takes is one weak link.
I strong;y disagree -- I suspect that Edward Snowden was at some point convinced (maybe still is) that dumping all the intelligence data he had for the world (ALL) to see made the world a safer place. I just don't buy that something that is supposed to be so secure can be walked off with, in front of combined US military intelligence (oxymoron) and other so-called intelligence agencies with the US. It has been proven many times the all it takes is one weak link.
NO you don't. You get a video that doesn't work, you also get a video to replace the LCD not the glass.
I can never find exactly what I am wanting whether I use quotes or not. What I want is something that can actually understand the context of
How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?
Search engines look for words and not context simply because computers are too dumb to understand context. They simply don't have the processing power to understand it.
The problem with search engines is that they rely on keywords and tags which not everyone is willing to fill in so right away they are a flawed concept.
Oh please. You pop in for this? We've been over this before. Go back to counting your Google shares. You know this is a settled issue.
You're absolutely correct It was settled some time ago. Google does not sell data. I didn't expect you to have any backup for what I'll assume was an honest mistake on your part. It's not the first time your memory has played tricks on you.
Mine sometimes fails me too. That's why I take a few minutes to have a look around when in doubt.
BTW I don't own any tech stock at all other than just a few shares of Qualcomm you you can scratch that off your list too.
1) Are you saying Google doesn't aggregate large quantities of anonymized data and then which it then sells to advertisers through bidding for certain keywords in order for clickable ads to appear in Google's search results.
1) Are you saying Google doesn't aggregate large quantities of anonymized data and then which it then sells to advertisers through bidding for certain keywords in order for clickable ads to appear in Google's search results.
2) Then what does Google sell?
They sell ad placement services. Are you saying there's someplace I can buy this Google data they have on you or me? Point me to it and I'll agree they sell data. Buying Adwords is hardly selling you data. That's selling you placement based on the data Google securely retains to itself.
They sell ad placement services. Are you saying there's someplace I can buy this Google data they have on you or me? Point me to it and I'll agree they sell data. Buying Adwords is hardly selling you data. That's selling you placement based on the data Google retains.
1) Google does sell data, you're just trying to use some specific definition of it (which you never clarify) so you can say they don't. Apple sells data. All iTunes Store, App Store, and iBookstore sales are data.
2) How does Google sell "ad placement services" that work if the data they collect for their customers in no way reflect the Eloi activities it's targeting?
1) Google does sell data, you're just trying to use some specific definition of it (which you never clarify) so you can say they don't. Apple sells data. All iTunes Store, App Store, and iBookstore sales are data.
2) How does Google sell "ad placement services" that work if the data they collect for their customers in no way reflect the Eloi activities it's targeting?
Soli if it never leaves their custody and control how did Google and Apple sell it? No sir, both companies securely keep the data they have on you under lock and key for their own uses, no one else's. But both will sell you access to customers for your product or service by using the data they keep for themselves.
They don't sell the data itself, they sell ad placement targeting the customers whose data was accumulated by them.
Comments
Sounds like this is a good job candidate filtering tool, meaning it's easier to do the job when you have more data to build models and "innovate" in this field, but it takes real genius to provide similar if not equal or superior services when you have access to less information. Filter out the people who can't do their jobs without the easy (comprehensive) information and you'll have the people who are really going to shake things up with access only to privacy respecting data, because that's where the talent is required and that's where genius will be found.
Essentially all of modern AI uses statistical learning which recognizes patterns in large amounts of data. This does not seem to be some fad either - biological neural networks are also trained with huge amounts of data: our brains don't learn from singular experiences but thousands.
Giving this up would mean to go back to primitive expert systems and language understanding systems that analyze natural language, for example, by trying to parse some universal grammar structure. These systems have never worked remotely as well as statistical NLP models.
Moreover, the ability to train ML models is not continuous in the amount data available - when you have only 10% of data available then your model might not even perform 10% as well as the competition but is possibly completely useless since it cannot be trained with available data.
Asking young researchers to do ML without access to big data is a bit like asking a particle physics researcher to test the standard model with the equipment in some basement lab instead of going to CERN.
Here's the thing. ALL search engines suck at the moment and have ZERO intelligence to them.
A real AI search engine would use natural language queries to search.
How come I can't do a search for "How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?" (don't ask but essentially cheap friends buying cheap equipment and going the cheap route to get it fixed) and not get a bunch of videos for a Samsung Galaxy 4?
When I do this search I come up with 2 videos and several How-to guides. What else do you want?
Modern search engines are in fact amazing compared to anything that was available even 15 years ago when such information had to be hunted down in some obscure hobbyist magazines (if at all).
Apple can use as much of my personal data as they want--so long as it stays on my phone!
I’m still left wondering how much space would be taken up by local Siri software to do the processing on-device. And why we don’t have local Siri on Macs, where such restrictions are less... well, Apple’s making them more important these days.
I wouldn't think the storage space or the processing capabilities are feasible to hold Siri on a Mac. What I would like to see is a more intelligent front-end, at least as an option, especially for iOS, where I can ask about a contact to be called which would then determine if this needs Siri (from Apple's servers) or just the same local, but simple system, albeit updated, that existed before Siri arrived. As it stands now it has to be one of the other, so even if you have no network access it won't be able to do something like the voice control for music of yore, which I think was faster before Siri, at least initially. (Note: I can't confirm that as accurate as I never measured it with a stopwatch)
When I do this search I come up with 2 videos and several How-to guides. What else do you want?
Modern search engines are in fact amazing compared to anything that was available even 15 years ago when such information had to be hunted down in some obscure hobbyist magazines (if at all).
NO you don't. You get a video that doesn't work, you also get a video to replace the LCD not the glass.
I can never find exactly what I am wanting whether I use quotes or not. What I want is something that can actually understand the context of
How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?
Search engines look for words and not context simply because computers are too dumb to understand context. They simply don't have the processing power to understand it.
The problem with search engines is that they rely on keywords and tags which not everyone is willing to fill in so right away they are a flawed concept.
IIRC, you are asked to opt in when you first set up an iOS device.
If you don't understand why they need this data, then perhaps it isn't them that aren't too bright.
There is general purpose AI, and there is AI that is more personally oriented. I had an assistant in my company. She knew about much of what I needed to do, and she would take care of a lot of things that I didn't have time for, as well as reminding me of appointments, and other matters that required my attention. If she didn't know all about my needs, based on what I knew, and did, then she wouldn't have been very useful. The same is true of Siri and the rest of these "assistants". The more they know of what you know, and do, the more helpful they will be.
I've read a few articles that stated, correctly, that Apple will never have a personal assistant as useful as Google Now and Cortana because most personal data is out of bounds for them. And yes, that is correct. It's a matter of priorities.
So trying to hire an expert in these matters for personal assistants, and then telling them that most personal data is off bounds, is discouraging, and they may decide to stay away.
I believe that Apple should do what it's doing with health data. Keep it private, but allow the user to decide if a specific usage model is ok for some data to be released to it, such as the medical studies which seem to be increasingly popular in iOS. So, people should be asked if they want to participate in Apple's AI research by allowing specific data to be used for that purpose, with the proviso that people can shut the tap to that data at any time, and that the data will never leave Apple's labs. That could solve many of these requitment problems, and with the hundreds of millions of people around the world using iOS devices, enough would choose to participate in this for it to be useful.
I think it's a matter of time. Once you have a home server that aggregates those years of data about you, instead of "in the cloud", this whole debate disappears. Siri hosted on an Apple Home Server would solve the privacy and security issue.
Here's the thing. ALL search engines suck at the moment and have ZERO intelligence to them.
A real AI search engine would use natural language queries to search.
How come I can't do a search for "How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?" (don't ask but essentially cheap friends buying cheap equipment and going the cheap route to get it fixed) and not get a bunch of videos for a Samsung Galaxy 4? I'll tell you why it's because a search engine query actually looks like this:
How+do+I+replace+the+glass+on+a+Samsung+Galaxy+4+Active
This will give me a search for every word not the entire phrase. I cannot be the only person on the planet to want to have searched that exact phrase so straight away the search engine's lack of intelligence comes to light.
Oh and don't give me that whole use quotes or set to search phrase because it still gives me the crap results I get with the boolean search.
If Apple can crack natural language queries then not only will they be onto a winner but they will CRUSH Google and Google will never recover.
NO you don't. You get a video that doesn't work, you also get a video to replace the LCD not the glass.
I can never find exactly what I am wanting whether I use quotes or not. What I want is something that can actually understand the context of
How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?
Search engines look for words and not context simply because computers are too dumb to understand context. They simply don't have the processing power to understand it.
The problem with search engines is that they rely on keywords and tags which not everyone is willing to fill in so right away they are a flawed concept.
Search engines extract keywords and tags automatically from natural language queries and websites. There is no need to fill anything by anyone - otherwise search engines would be pretty useless.
They then extract context by matching these keywords to data repositories. For example, a search engine can learn that "Britney Spears" is a singer by looking for Wikipedia articles that mention her. This is very similar to how people understand context - all the processing power in the world will not allow you to make a connection between "Britney Spears" and "singer" unless you have enough data to learn from.
Finally about your query: Not sure what search engine you are using but the 4th entry on Google (using exactly your query) directs to a lengthy discussion about just replacing the glass - and that this seems impossible. Modern smartphones have the digitizer fused with the glass and hence it is next to impossible to just replace the glass.
No search engine can point you to an article or a solution that doesn't exist.
Bingo. It's a false dichotomy. In the pre-Google world, AI meant machine intelligence, machine learning, and natural language parsing. In the Google world, AI now means creepy data collection about human test subjects? Are we building HAL9000 or f-ing SkyNet, An Alphabet subsidiary?
It's because no one yet knows how to do real, thinking, AI, so they are trying to put lipstick on a search engine. And search engines need big DBs.
I would rather have Apple kill Siri than lose privacy.
If AI experts need private data, then they aren't that bright to begin with.
Just playing devil's advocate here, but wouldn't "machine learning" include my "private" data? Couldn't access be granted to such data if only temporarily? And if it's temporary, how, then, does the machine "learn" and how does it "remember" and what does it use as it's "memories"? I'm not a PHD in AI, so these may be dumb questions, I'm just genuinely curious, and, of course, I don't expect you to have all the answers either.
This is silly. All companies have to do is ask when they want your data and tell you exactly what they're doing with it. I personally have zero concerns that Apple will improperly use my data so I have no problem sharing it with them if it ultimately makes for a better user experience.
Which is basically what happens now, to varying extents afaict. I haven't memorized the Siri Privacy Statement, but I'm guessing it encapsulates this in essence. It would become pretty annoying pretty quick to have to "confirm or deny" every time I wanted to ask Siri to do something
Just playing devil's advocate here, but wouldn't "machine learning" include my "private" data? Couldn't access be granted to such data if only temporarily? And if it's temporary, how, then, does the machine "learn" and how does it "remember" and what does it use as it's "memories"? I'm not a PHD in AI, so these may be dumb questions, I'm just genuinely curious, and, of course, I don't expect you to have all the answers either.
My understanding (from watching the WWDC presentations earlier in the year) is that Siri will indeed index/learn from your private data, but it will build it's knowledge database locally, on your phone. This is in contrast to putting the database on their servers (which is what other companies do).
This was the middle ground Apple found between not indexing your data at all (which would make Siri less useful) and protecting your privacy to some degree.
Actually that's a terrible idea. Apple's main draw is even they can't access the info as it's gone or encrypted even from them. Break that barrier and gov't subpoenas will be flying left and right and Apple will have no defense against providing the data.
Originally Posted by CanukStorm
... "The vast improvements in user experience far, far outweigh the potential security risks to private information."
I strong;y disagree -- I suspect that Edward Snowden was at some point convinced (maybe still is) that dumping all the intelligence data he had for the world (ALL) to see made the world a safer place. I just don't buy that something that is supposed to be so secure can be walked off with, in front of combined US military intelligence (oxymoron) and other so-called intelligence agencies with the US. It has been proven many times the all it takes is one weak link.
He was a contract worker.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSL2N0GF11220130815
And his last employer was Booz Allen Hamilton. The media very lazily reports that he worked for the NSA.
The last location he worked was in Hawai'i and that provided him unique opportunity to take the actions he took.
http://forums.androidcentral.com/samsung-galaxy-s4-active/319847-galaxy-s4-active-screen-replacement-just-glass.html
and the second one from the top:
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Samsung+Galaxy+S4+Cracked+Front+Glass+Replacement/21843
Neither one is a video altho the next two listed are. I can only assume you're using something other than Google?
Oh please. You pop in for this? We've been over this before. Go back to counting your Google shares. You know this is a settled issue.
Mine sometimes fails me too. That's why I take a few minutes to have a look around when in doubt.
BTW I don't own any tech stock at all other than just a few shares of Qualcomm you you can scratch that off your list too.
1) Are you saying Google doesn't aggregate large quantities of anonymized data and then which it then sells to advertisers through bidding for certain keywords in order for clickable ads to appear in Google's search results.
2) Then what does Google sell?
1) Google does sell data, you're just trying to use some specific definition of it (which you never clarify) so you can say they don't. Apple sells data. All iTunes Store, App Store, and iBookstore sales are data.
2) How does Google sell "ad placement services" that work if the data they collect for their customers in no way reflect the Eloi activities it's targeting?
They don't sell the data itself, they sell ad placement targeting the customers whose data was accumulated by them.