Why your job is safe: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|technology|[[File:Goldman football predicition.png|450px|thumb|left|Goldman’s data wizards predicted this:]]
{{a|technology|[[File:Goldman football predicition.png|450px|thumb|center|Goldman’s data wizards predicted this:]]
[[File:Actual football outcome.png|450px|thumb|left|We actually got 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.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]]
Line 7: Line 7:


Your job is safe as long as:
Your job is safe as long as:
*Those splendid data-wizard brianboxes at Goldman Sachs can get their predictions this wrong ==>
*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 ==>

Revision as of 10:46, 14 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


Index: Click to expand:
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”.

See also