Why your job is safe: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|technology|[[File:Cricket prediction.png|450px|thumb|center|A likely sporting outcome according to Google yesterday]]}}An occasional running series.
{{a|technology|[[File:Goldman football predicition.png|450px|thumb|center|Goldman’s data wizards predicted this:]]
[[File:Actual football outcome.png|450px|thumb|center|We actually got this:]]
[[File:Cricket prediction.png|450px|thumb|center|A likely sporting outcome according to Google a couple of years ago]]
[[File:Cricket prediction 2.png|450px|thumb|center|A likely sporting outcome according to Google yesterday]]
[[File:Amazon recommendation.jpg|450px|thumb|center|Nice one, Amazon]]
}}An occasional running series intended to pose the question: when will Adam Curtis’ assertion that the vaunted predictive power of big data is a “modern ghost story”.


Your job is safe as long as:
Your job is safe as long as:
 
*Those splendid data-wizard brainboxes at [[Goldman Sachs]] can get their predictions this wrong ==>
*Google thinks that ==> is a sensible win prediction for a cricket match.
*Google thinks this ==> is a sensible win prediction for a cricket match.
*Microsoft’s auto-correct for bhusiness suggests “bushiness” but not “business”.
*Or, for that matter, this ==>
*Microsoft’s auto-correct for “bhusiness” suggests “bushiness” but not “business”.
*Android voice recognition interprets “Richard Strauss” as “Richard’s trouser”.
*Android voice recognition interprets “Richard Strauss” as “Richard’s trouser”.
*Amazon can send push notification to a customer with adult children and no car, about whom it has 25 years of rich data, guessing that he would like a new car-seat


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*[[Artificial intelligence]]
*[[Artificial intelligence]]
*[[Technology is a leveller]]

Latest revision as of 14:23, 29 July 2021

JC pontificates about technology
An occasional series.
Goldman’s data wizards predicted this:
We actually got this:
A likely sporting outcome according to Google a couple of years ago
A likely sporting outcome according to Google yesterday
Nice one, Amazon
Index: Click ᐅ to expand:
Technology
Design
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

An occasional running series intended to pose the question: when will Adam Curtis’ assertion that the vaunted predictive power of big data is a “modern ghost story”.

Your job is safe as long as:

  • Those splendid data-wizard brainboxes at Goldman Sachs can get their predictions this wrong ==>
  • Google thinks this ==> is a sensible win prediction for a cricket match.
  • Or, for that matter, this ==>
  • Microsoft’s auto-correct for “bhusiness” suggests “bushiness” but not “business”.
  • Android voice recognition interprets “Richard Strauss” as “Richard’s trouser”.
  • Amazon can send push notification to a customer with adult children and no car, about whom it has 25 years of rich data, guessing that he would like a new car-seat

See also

Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Why_your_job_is_safe&oldid=58105"