Why your job is safe: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|technology|[[File:Goldman football predicition.png|450px|thumb| | {{a|technology|[[File:Goldman football predicition.png|450px|thumb|center|Goldman’s data wizards predicted this:]] | ||
[[File:Actual football outcome.png|450px|thumb| | [[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.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: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”. | }}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 | *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. | *Google thinks this ==> is a sensible win prediction for a cricket match. | ||
*Or, for that matter, this ==> | *Or, for that matter, this ==> | ||
*Microsoft’s auto-correct for “bhusiness” suggests “bushiness” but not “business”. | *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]] | *[[Technology is a leveller]] | ||
Latest revision as of 14:23, 29 July 2021
|
JC pontificates about technology
An occasional series.     
|
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