General Discussion

Kelvin Mace

(17,469 posts)

56. It is still using pattern matching based on images linked to on the web

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 11:49 PM

Mar 2016

or the images in the Google Photo database. Also, most photos these days, especially those taken with phones have a LOT of useful metadata embedded in them (date, time, GPS location, any tags added by social media apps, email apps, etc), which can help ID an image. Also, when you upload your photos and start sorting them, you are giving Google more data to mine for pattern matching.

But, as I explain, upload an image that has never been online, has no metadata, like that of a person, and Google is stumped. A high percentage of people in America will look at my photo of George Takei and will be able to identify him by name, or as Mr. Sulu, or the guy from Star Trek, whereas Google is baffled.

Pattern matching is not recognition. And even when you get pattern matching into the high 90 percentile, it is still way inferior to the human brain.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

77 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This is why we are not about to be replaced by robots [View all] Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 OP

But they're getting closer everyday... PoliticAverse Mar 2016 #1

Yes, and Google is now selling that company Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #4

It seems Google is having difficulty integrating its AI with its physical robots... Humanist_Activist Mar 2016 #34

There are a number of problems that must be overcome Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #35

People in the future are going to laugh at our attempts in creating AI lumberjack_jeff Mar 2016 #43

And while it is easy to point to a 777 aircraft and say Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #45

Cool but google photos does that quite handily Egnever Mar 2016 #2

Yes, but Google relies on image TAGS Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #5

No it doesn't Egnever Mar 2016 #48

Yes, they are using tags Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #51

You are confusing a google image search with google photos Egnever Mar 2016 #52

It is still using pattern matching based on images linked to on the web Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #56

Again I don't think you are correct see the post below Egnever Mar 2016 #57

From a link inside your own popular mechanics article Egnever Mar 2016 #54

Key sentences from the article Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #62

Now you are quibbling Egnever Mar 2016 #76

Point is they CLAIM Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #77

Just take a step back to the progress between 1950 and now Albertoo Mar 2016 #3

Again, we underestimate what the human brain can do Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #6

Like often in discussion, it's all in the qualifiers Albertoo Mar 2016 #7

Absolutely true, Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #46

I fear you picked a bad example Albertoo Mar 2016 #49

I disagree. Google translate can simply convert words from one language to another Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #53

My dear Holmes, Watson proves you wrong Albertoo Mar 2016 #55

Actually, I addressed Watson Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #59

tsk, tsk, tsk, you keep moving the goalposts Albertoo Mar 2016 #61

My point in my original post was that Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #63

practical robots that will start taking people's jobs??? It started happening ages ago. Albertoo Mar 2016 #64

And yet, there are still travel agents Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #67

Yes, but far less Albertoo Mar 2016 #68

From my original post Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #69

Robots replaced humans in manufacturing even earlier Albertoo Mar 2016 #70

Do you see the robots in the video Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #71

We probably do not have a signiificant disagreement. It's just about words. Albertoo Mar 2016 #75

There is a reason Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking are warning us about AI. killbotfactory Mar 2016 #11

Yes, Musk and Hawking are right to be woried about AIs, Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #13

It doesn't need to replace all human jobs, just some of them. Calista241 Mar 2016 #60

Really? Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #65

Yeah, I can see the future and it says Robots will get better faster Johonny Mar 2016 #18

"Faster" is a relative term Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #72

Good thing humans aren't affected by EMP. Deadshot Mar 2016 #29

Excellent pic Albertoo Mar 2016 #50

Robots won't replace human workers, but automation will. procon Mar 2016 #8

But automation can only do certain tasks within very well defined parameters Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #14

Just a wild guess, but your company's output has increased too perhaps? whatthehey Mar 2016 #31

Absolutely, Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #73

Automation is dramatically reducing the human labor required for many kinds of manufacturing. cheapdate Mar 2016 #9

Yes, it is happening, and will continue to happen Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #15

Automation is going to hit white collar workers next killbotfactory Mar 2016 #10

True, but of late Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #17

Humans don't have a halting issue. Rex Mar 2016 #12

Robots require power Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #16

True, it is curious how some simple tasks for humans are NPhard for a computer. Rex Mar 2016 #32

What computers can do is simple tasks at close to the speed of light. Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #36

Yes that is the crux of the problem, their ability to interpret important information Rex Mar 2016 #47

Tell that to Lee Sedol MowCowWhoHow III Mar 2016 #19

Golly, a computer they spent over a decade designing Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #23

It's pretty obvious you don't have a good grasp of the subject area MowCowWhoHow III Mar 2016 #24

Yes, I do. Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #38

Yes, much of our "knowledge" is embedded in our perceptual apparatus. bemildred Mar 2016 #20

I'm inclined to agree with you and I work in an industry that seems to be trying to replace me! A HERETIC I AM Mar 2016 #21

Precisely! Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #22

One thing about "Automatic braking"..... A HERETIC I AM Mar 2016 #25

You outline the other problem of innovation and automation Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #39

"the miracle of the human body" meme is mostly magical thinking phantom power Mar 2016 #26

I don't recall using the word "miracle" Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #40

You are being too literal. Humans have already been replaced "in vast quantities" by robots. ieoeja Mar 2016 #27

Actually what you are seeing there is more the result of outsourcing Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #74

For what it is worth, usedtobedemgurl Mar 2016 #28

Yes, you bring up the economics of the issue Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #44

The list of jobs not requiring visual identification of different objects is not small whatthehey Mar 2016 #30

Visual identification is just one aspect of a task Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #42

That's one area that human being excel in, but just because we excel at one doesn't mean... Humanist_Activist Mar 2016 #33

A would distinguish between warehouses Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #41

As long as they don't replace art teachers...n/t PasadenaTrudy Mar 2016 #37

FFS, you sound like the people in 1905 who said man flying was a century away..... Logical Mar 2016 #58

And as I point out Kelvin Mace Mar 2016 #66