Author Topic: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job  (Read 249 times)

Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3756
  • Gender: Male
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2017, 09:29:22 AM »
I'm sure they took into account many possibilities, they did make the instructions very basic and easy to understand. You seem to be hell bent on blaming everyone but the trainers. Given your train of thought here; when a driver ignores a stop sign and crashes into someone, you would blame the sign makers while I would blame the driver.

Well, if professionals design something that allows the non-professional subjects to be lazy, sloppy, untruthful, micheivous, malicious or simply misunderstand, with loose parameters . . .
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.

Davin

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 6411
  • Gender: Male
  • (o°-°)=o o(o*-°)
    • DevPirates
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #16 on: September 06, 2017, 09:35:25 AM »
You can't prevent people from being lazy, sloppy, untruthful, micheivous, malicious or simply misunderstand. That's up to the people, hence why one blames the people whoa are being lazy, sloppy, untruthful, mischievous, malicious or for misunderstanding simple instructions.

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3756
  • Gender: Male
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #17 on: September 06, 2017, 09:53:43 AM »
You can't prevent people from being lazy, sloppy, untruthful, micheivous, malicious or simply misunderstand. That's up to the people, hence why one blames the people whoa are being lazy, sloppy, untruthful, mischievous, malicious or for misunderstanding simple instructions.
Then those results could be unreliable and that method should not be used to produce something that others might rely on. There must be millions of reported and/or rejected posts and comments out there that are amenable to analysis as to their content. Finance researchers have, reportedly, used positive/negative word or meme frequency in Twitter to predict market fluctuations (but that may have been a case of  correlation without causation, haven't followed it up recently).
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.

Davin

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 6411
  • Gender: Male
  • (o°-°)=o o(o*-°)
    • DevPirates
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #18 on: September 06, 2017, 09:57:53 AM »
You can't prevent people from being lazy, sloppy, untruthful, micheivous, malicious or simply misunderstand. That's up to the people, hence why one blames the people whoa are being lazy, sloppy, untruthful, mischievous, malicious or for misunderstanding simple instructions.
Then those results could be unreliable and that method should not be used to produce something that others might rely on. There must be millions of reported and/or rejected posts and comments out there that are amenable to analysis as to their content. Finance researchers have, reportedly, used positive/negative word or meme frequency in Twitter to predict market fluctuations (but that may have been a case of  correlation without causation, haven't followed it up recently).
The method is fine, it was the trainers that failed.

Here's an example: You ask someone a question. They lie to you. Do you blame them or yourself for their lie?

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3756
  • Gender: Male
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #19 on: September 06, 2017, 10:13:09 AM »
You can't prevent people from being lazy, sloppy, untruthful, micheivous, malicious or simply misunderstand. That's up to the people, hence why one blames the people whoa are being lazy, sloppy, untruthful, mischievous, malicious or for misunderstanding simple instructions.
Then those results could be unreliable and that method should not be used to produce something that others might rely on. There must be millions of reported and/or rejected posts and comments out there that are amenable to analysis as to their content. Finance researchers have, reportedly, used positive/negative word or meme frequency in Twitter to predict market fluctuations (but that may have been a case of  correlation without causation, haven't followed it up recently).
The method is fine, it was the trainers that failed.

Here's an example: You ask someone a question. They lie to you. Do you blame them or yourself for their lie?
You are recruiting the wrong kind of "someone" - OK,, this is a never ending argument about a subject that is subject to the failings of human nature in all aspects. They are obviously doing the best job they can with the available real world resources they accessed. But if the product fails - fix it or scrap it, try harder next time, improve the method or use a different one.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.

Davin

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 6411
  • Gender: Male
  • (o°-°)=o o(o*-°)
    • DevPirates
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #20 on: September 06, 2017, 10:30:19 AM »
You are recruiting the wrong kind of "someone" - OK,, this is a never ending argument about a subject that is subject to the failings of human nature in all aspects. They are obviously doing the best job they can with the available real world resources they accessed. But if the product fails - fix it or scrap it, try harder next time, improve the method or use a different one.
This can be resolved if you answer this simple question:

You ask someone a question.
They lie to you.
Are you to blame for their lie?

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3756
  • Gender: Male
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #21 on: September 06, 2017, 11:07:11 AM »
You are recruiting the wrong kind of "someone" - OK,, this is a never ending argument about a subject that is subject to the failings of human nature in all aspects. They are obviously doing the best job they can with the available real world resources they accessed. But if the product fails - fix it or scrap it, try harder next time, improve the method or use a different one.
This can be resolved if you answer this simple question:

You ask someone a question.
They lie to you.
Are you to blame for their lie?

In simple circumstances not it is not the questioners fault. In the design of a system like this I refer you to my previous reply. If the product is to be sold as being suitable for a specific purpose the onus is in the seller to ensure that every possible negative factor has been allowed for or tested for during the design and marketing. If you cannot do that just don't bother doing that job.

It was part of my last job, as the senior development lab tech, to look for the basic things forgotten or ignored by the guys with titles in front of or letters after their names. Then test the product to its limits and sometimes beyond. That went for software and written stuff as well as the hardware. It had to be as idiot proof as possible before it went on the market. Had we employed untrained assemblers, even with very carefully written instructions, and produced a line of half functioning products whose fault would it be?

Cybermods are not so easy as lumps of hardware I recognise, but there are still basic "rules" to follow. There have been some horrendously expensive software failures in UK government departments mainly put down to badly written specs, poor analysis, people with no knowledge of, say, health systems in the design chain, a lack of monitoring . . .

Do the cybermod designers employ psychologists, language use experts etc  I wonder.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.

Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3756
  • Gender: Male
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #22 on: September 06, 2017, 11:37:05 AM »
Perhaps they need a memeticist as well!  :grin:

Quote
Memetics is notable for sidestepping the traditional concern with the truth of ideas and beliefs. Instead, it is interested in their success.

Quite interesting application of the idea to the evolving concepts of "toxicity" in responses on the web.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.

Davin

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 6411
  • Gender: Male
  • (o°-°)=o o(o*-°)
    • DevPirates
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #23 on: September 06, 2017, 12:16:34 PM »
You are recruiting the wrong kind of "someone" - OK,, this is a never ending argument about a subject that is subject to the failings of human nature in all aspects. They are obviously doing the best job they can with the available real world resources they accessed. But if the product fails - fix it or scrap it, try harder next time, improve the method or use a different one.
This can be resolved if you answer this simple question:

You ask someone a question.
They lie to you.
Are you to blame for their lie?

In simple circumstances not it is not the questioners fault.
In what circumstances does it become the questioners fault for the liars lies?

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3756
  • Gender: Male
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #24 on: September 06, 2017, 12:43:21 PM »
I can only repeat my arguments, which you cannot accept, so it is not worth continuing this discussion.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.

Davin

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 6411
  • Gender: Male
  • (o°-°)=o o(o*-°)
    • DevPirates
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #25 on: September 06, 2017, 01:20:48 PM »
I cannot accept things that don't make sense. Your arguments as they stand do not make sense, so I cannot accept them.

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3756
  • Gender: Male
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #26 on: September 06, 2017, 01:29:46 PM »
I cannot accept things that don't make sense. Your arguments as they stand do not make sense, so I cannot accept them.
You are entitled to your view of things, Davin, as we all are.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.

Davin

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 6411
  • Gender: Male
  • (o°-°)=o o(o*-°)
    • DevPirates
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #27 on: September 06, 2017, 01:34:20 PM »
Meh, it's more than just my view of things. But go ahead and do whatever you think you have to do to make yourself feel better about it.

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Has an Invisible Dragon in Their Garage
  • *****
  • Posts: 3756
  • Gender: Male
Re: Algorithm Moderators Aren't Quite up to The Job
« Reply #28 on: September 06, 2017, 01:51:46 PM »
I feel that is bordering on being offensive, Davin.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.