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 |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
*Google thinks that ==> is a sensible win prediction for a cricket match. | *Google thinks that ==> is a sensible win prediction for a cricket match. | ||
*Microsoft’s auto-correct for | *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”. | ||
*Those splendid data-wizard brianboxes at Goldman Sachs can get their predictions this wrong | *Those splendid data-wizard brianboxes at Goldman Sachs can get their predictions this wrong ==> | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Artificial intelligence]] | *[[Artificial intelligence]] | ||
*[[Technology is a leveller]] |
Revision as of 08:10, 12 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:
- Google thinks that ==> is a sensible win prediction for a cricket match.
- Microsoft’s auto-correct for “bhusiness” suggests “bushiness” but not “business”.
- Android voice recognition interprets “Richard Strauss” as “Richard’s trouser”.
- Those splendid data-wizard brianboxes at Goldman Sachs can get their predictions this wrong ==>