I read the article and I find this fascinating. I am happy they are giving it some thought. Pronoun political correctness (a.k.a. thoughtfulness or respectfulness) aside, if our society's training data leads AIs to make assumptions, we should be aware of it and be careful to detect it.
An incorrect pronoun isn't going to kill someone -- but we are gradually handing over more and more decisions to technologies that rely on AI/ML. Perhaps investigations into incorrect pronoun assumptions can lead to improvements in assumption errors in other areas (e.g. you think your self driving vehicle doesn't need radars and that only using cameras is sufficient? Just because it looks like a big fluffy cloud doesn't necessarily mean you can safely fly/drive through it).
Back to just pronouns though: if someone says "My teacher assigned me to read Act I of Macbeth tonight", most people would avoid a reply that uses he/she until an indication was given or they'd just ask "Who's that, Ms. McFadden? Yeah, I know, she assigns way too much homework!". If a human can be smart enough to get it right, then I'm glad folks are working on AIs getting it right too (or, for now, not making assumptions until they can get it right).
The fact that AIs are advanced enough for us to be thinking about these kinds of details is wonderful! :)
> There is no such thing as "shortage" of anything. Just pay more, and you'll get it.
Businesses are also limited by how much their customers are willing to pay for the item/service their workforce produces.
If a company's labour costs are higher than the price their customers are willing to pay for the product they are selling, then that product won't be produced.
e.g. if the labour that goes into making raspberries means the customer has to pay $6.99 for a tiny little package of raspberries at the grocery store, and no one in the world is willing to pay that, then raspberries will no longer be sold.
I'm not saying that there currently isn't room to pay higher wages, I'm just saying there is a practical limit to "just pay more".
On 26 Sep. 1982 in 'Knight of the Phoenix' when Michael falls asleep KITT automatically takes over.
Google should have a camera pointing at the driver and use machine learning to detect someone that is asleep or medically impaired and automatically take over if the car starts to leave its lane.
Perhaps the driver could configure where it wants the car to go in such a case (if asleep: continue to final destination; if medical issue: drive to nearest hospital and call "Parent" or "Spouse" on cell phone and explain the situation; if smart watch can detect alcohol in your sweat therefore unconsciousness likely due to intoxication: drive to a trusted friend and call ahead, etc.).
At the very least, if the person appears to be asleep it could ask "Are you sure you want to return to manual control?". It should be able to tell the difference between someone sleeping and someone alert wanting control back.
It's been some decades since fiction inspired us, but we're getting close!
Maybe later, but there are an awful lot of fuzzy heroic heuristics in there. For now, I'd say the only safe thing to do when the driver falls asleep is come to a safe stop.
Under the circumstances, I'd accept just slowly rolling to a stop with the hazard lights on. People behind the car will hate it, but probably no one will die.
Sadly, I can still imagine someone crashing into a static car on the highway. I can imagine normal-speed continuation, mid-lane stopping, and attempting to navigate to the side of the road all seem to have some pretty heavy risks. I do wonder if a low-speed continuation would be in any way suitable.
A "safe stop on the high way" means the side of the road in normal everyday context. That would be appropriate here, no? Highway patrol would check out the car pretty quickly.
Are you thinking Norway hitting 2025 is unrealistic being only 7 years away? A video from last year states electric car sales there are already near 30% of new car sales:
OMG! I have been looking for this for years (edit: decades!!) but didn't know the name of it! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU! I am so happy!!
There’s a point of view that short selling is important & ethical because it creates an incentive to find problems with companies and expose them. Hopefully they’re honest when they do it, but that applies to people pumping a stock too.
The bias should lead to more caution, but the disclosure was made. The disclosure would have been more ethical if it had been at the beginning - especially because of the likelyhood of people not reading to the end of the multi-paginated format.
Most of what I see on Seeking Alpha is people cherry picking charts and statistics to support a pre-existing hypothesis. Many times authors continually double down on clearly wrong opinions and just say "oh well, the market is crazy".
Surely if we're going to start accusing people of anti-NVidia bias we should include Charlie from SemiAccurate so he doesn't feel left out. He did coin the term "Bumpgate" after all.
It seems he has been tracking the AIB monthly revenue data out of Taiwan as well as trying to reconcile 2017 numbers with what Nvidia/Amd have reported on mining.And in Nvidia's case he seems focused on the CEO attributing gaming revenue strength in q1 entirely to Fortnite/PUBG when gamers had virtually no access to cards. So, the way I read it is he took the SemiAccurate report as evidence that CEO has gotten it wrong, and that this explained the very vague 'not for a long time' comment at Computex.
An incorrect pronoun isn't going to kill someone -- but we are gradually handing over more and more decisions to technologies that rely on AI/ML. Perhaps investigations into incorrect pronoun assumptions can lead to improvements in assumption errors in other areas (e.g. you think your self driving vehicle doesn't need radars and that only using cameras is sufficient? Just because it looks like a big fluffy cloud doesn't necessarily mean you can safely fly/drive through it).
Back to just pronouns though: if someone says "My teacher assigned me to read Act I of Macbeth tonight", most people would avoid a reply that uses he/she until an indication was given or they'd just ask "Who's that, Ms. McFadden? Yeah, I know, she assigns way too much homework!". If a human can be smart enough to get it right, then I'm glad folks are working on AIs getting it right too (or, for now, not making assumptions until they can get it right).
The fact that AIs are advanced enough for us to be thinking about these kinds of details is wonderful! :)