computers men: i want to make a computer do a thing that humans do

me: maybe you should ask the humans who do that thing how they do it

computers men: preposterous. absurd

@dankwraith
Wasn't that the whole basis of expert systems? You run into the same issue as anthropology, or any other field that rely on asking humans questions. There are three truths, the truth they tell you, the truth they believe, and the actual truth.

@alexjgriffith @dankwraith as opposed to Big Data, which... doesn't have this problem? not sure I buy that

@byttyrs
Yeah, there are issues with observing user behaviour vs asking them questions. But, if sampled correctly, these observations can get far closer to the ground truth.
@dankwraith

@alexjgriffith @dankwraith I'm not sure why "observing behavior" or "sampling correctly" seems like a less daunting bias elimination task to you than interpreting and evaluating answers. behavior is also nontrivially interpreted by the observer. 'data crunching' is not more objective— the computer just does what we tell it. it is just possibly economical in scale- it allows your questionable interpretive choices to play out over larger sets of questionable data more quickly

Follow

@byttyrs
As a trivial example. If I'm creating a system to enter the letter a, and I ask you how many times you enter the letter a in an average hour of work, you're not going to give me an accurate answer, wheather you want to or not.

The classic example of the limits of expert systems was the development of flight assist programs. Pilots where unwilling / unable to accurately answer questions concerning their flight activities.
@dankwraith

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!