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 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 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”.
*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 ==>


*Long term, [[technology is a leveller]] and not a provider of competitive advantage
{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*[[Artificial intelligence]]
*[[Artificial intelligence]]
*[[Technology is a leveller]]

Revision as of 08:10, 12 July 2021

The JC pontificates about technology
An occasional series.
A likely sporting outcome according to Google a couple of years ago
A likely sporting outcome according to Google yesterday
Goldman predicted this:
We actually got this:


Index: Click to expand:

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

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 ==>

See also