I hope not to sound like a broken record here ... but ... not every narrow AI advance is actually a step toward AGI ...
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So here is another step toward AGI, a hard image classification problem > solved with near human-level ability, and all I hear is criticism. Sheesh! I > hope your own work is not attacked like this. > > I would understand if the researchers had proposed something stupid like > using the software in court to distinguish adult and child pornography. > Please try to distinguish between the research and the commentary by the > reporters. A legitimate application could be estimating the average age plus > or minus 2 months of a group of 1000 shoppers in a marketing study. > > In any case, machine surveillance is here to stay. Get used to it. > > -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --- On Thu, 10/2/08, Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [agi] Let's face it, this is just dumb. > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Thursday, October 2, 2008, 6:21 AM > > 2008/10/2 Brad Paulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > It "boasts" a 50% recognition accuracy rate > > +/-5 years and an 80% > > > recognition accuracy rate +/-10 years. Unless, of > > course, the subject is > > > wearing a big floppy hat, makeup or has had Botox > > treatment recently. Or > > > found his dad's Ronald Reagan mask. 'Nuf > > said. > > > > > > Yes. This kind of accuracy would not be good enough to > > enforce age > > related rules surrounding the buying of certain products, > > nor does it > > seem likely to me that refinements of the technique will > > give the > > needed accuracy. As you point out people have been trying > > to fool > > others about their age for millenia, and this trend is only > > going to > > complicate matters further. In future if De Grey gets his > > way this > > kind of recognition will be useless anyway. > > > > > > > P.S. Oh, yeah, and the guy responsible for this > > project claims it doesn't > > > violate anyone's privacy because it can't be > > used to identify individuals. > > > Right. They don't say who sponsored this > > research, but I sincerely doubt > > > it was the vending machine companies or purveyors of > > Internet porn. > > > > > > It's good to question the true motives behind something > > like this, and > > where the funding comes from. I do a lot of stuff with > > computer > > vision, and if someone came to me saying they wanted > > something to > > visually recognise the age of a person I'd tell them > > that they're > > probably wasting their time, and that indicators other than > > visual > > ones would be more likely to give a reliable result. > > > > ------------------------------------------- > agi > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
