15
Meta Patents Technology to Detect Your Mood by Constantly Analyzing Your Tone of Voice (futurism.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/DeMeta@lemmy.world
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 3 months ago (22 children)

@madeindex good luck with that. It is entirely delusional to think that you can detect someone’s mood by how they sound or look. Or just plain stupid. I have hidden it very well and I have known others who do it way better than me because they can also smile. It is a futile endeavour. Worse than that it could lead to missing cases. That can be fatal. People should NEVER rely on technology to find out if someone needs help. Extremely irresponsible rubbish.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (21 children)

    @madeindex another classic example. Someone who is a sociopath or psychopath or even a narcissist. It takes real subtlety to pick up on it. And software does not do HUMAN subtleties. Because humans are far too complex. And even if it did pick up in some cases there’s the problem of the power of suggestion and various other things so how do you know they are REALLY feeling that way?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (20 children)

    @madeindex and even if it was say 1 per cent accurate or even 95 per cent accurate that’s still a hell of a lot of people to miss (not that everyone would be subjected to it). Oh and it’s creepy. That alone is reason to not do this. But why would those prats care about that?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (19 children)

    @madeindex yes I do know that they say YOUR mood but anyone who thinks this could not or would not be abused is very naïve indeed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (18 children)

    @xexyl @madeindex@lemmy.world Very good points, not like any of this would ever stop them however, as they love spending billions on products nobody asked for!As long as it's good enough for their money making needs, even if it's only right half the the time or less (might be able to detect somewhat simple indicators e.g. laughter, crying etc) and results in fatalities.I guess new technology always isn't perfect but these mega corps are utterly irresponsible and approach it with the worst motivations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (17 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world it reminds me of the ‘technology’ that supposedly could detect (by facial expressions) someone’s sexual orientation. Which when I read about it years ago immediately reminded me of the Gestapo. Why? Well they more than once offered a Jew a job. The Nazis (and the SS were classic here) had pseudo science including that by analysing the skull you can tell if they were Jewish (a more accurate check if not perfectly you probably know).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (16 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world the SS Lebensborn (to create Aryans to replace the lost blood) despite having ‘background checks’ going back generations ended up creating not ‘pure’ people. Women were even given benefits to have sex with ‘pure’ SS men. There is the infamous caste for occultism. The common part is Himmler. And although I don’t know if this part is true he purportedly believed he was King Henry reincarnated. Well it’s easy to believe that!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (15 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world but there also were and are a lot of lies and misinformation and bad memories and other things. Something that a lot of people don’t know is that there were Jewish Nazis including in the SS (Himmler didn’t like it but Hitler overruled him). Göring famously said ‘I decide who is a Jew’. Well it’s just like all bigotry: it’s a default but it doesn’t mean there aren’t exceptions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (14 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world regardless the idea that technology can accurately detect these types of things has been shown historically to be complete rubbish yet people still go for it. You are right though. Of course they don’t care! Anything for money or other gains (whatever that means to them). Still it’s creepy to try and have technology that analyses someone’s face to decide if they are happy or something else. It’s also completely stupid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (11 children)

    @xexyl Did you at the time read about this leak? They even have an “attractive” score.techcrunch.com/2019/05/03/chin@madeindex@lemmy.world

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world no but it doesn’t surprise me in the least. It’s much like the first example I mentioned. Different yes but similar in concept. And it’s creepy and bonkers. On the other hand ‘artificial intelligence-powered smart city technology’ makes me laugh. And also it scares me. The wording is ridiculous but the fact that people are aiming for this - that’s the problem. Oh well. Not that we can do anything about it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world it amazes me how many programmes on tv (and other things too) now claim that they are using AI. But as far as tv: what is wrong with CGI? This is just mad. There’s no need to use LLM (which frankly is what they mean). I don’t understand it. It’s pointless and unnecessary. Why use something else when there is something specifically designed for what you need? Assuming they actually don’t use CGI of course.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world it’s more baffling when LLM manages to make so many mistakes. CGI has worked well for decades. But now that ‘AI’ is in the common language people seem to be using it for everything. And unfortunately it’s also making people suspect even more what they see including some really lovely things that are real.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (6 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world for all its faults I think that last one is one of the most tragic. So many people now see something and first think: okay but that looks too good to be true and since we have ‘this’ it must not be!It’s good to not believe everything you see (people have faked things for eternity) but it is now a lot harder to actually determine things. To me that’s a huge problem and a huge tragedy. #ai #llm

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (5 children)

    @xexyl It's very very concerning to me as well! I even expect a future where video and photographic evidence is useless. @madeindex@lemmy.world

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world another thing that is only related to ‘useless’: the fact that literally became a contronym. As a logophile who has spent hours (even as a kid) in the dictionary this type of thing gets to me very badly. When a word has its opposite meaning it makes it useless. It’s annoying that I have to reword things to avoid it. Yet on occasion it’s really the best word.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world Some examples are comical. Many of us have thought of the ridiculous ‘inflammable’ and others like that. Yes lexicographers have to update according to how the words are being used. But sometimes they note it’s non standard. They should have at least done that. Btw an example of a long list that popped into my head decades ago: the word long is short than short. Wide and narrow. There are countless others. Language is hilarious. And stupid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world although in that case a better word (than stupid) Is ironic. Still though it is amusing. Here’s a fun word (and then I better bugger off before something bad happens): logomachy (pl. logomachies). An argument about or over words. A lot more tucked in my head as well of course. And yes I am afraid that I am very guilty of being in many logomachies!(On the other hand it can be fun!)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world well yeah that’s a concern indeed. But here’s the thing. It might already be. And all these stupid shows using ‘it’ - it makes it even worse. Yes some of it can be picked up on. But still there are very big problems already. Unfortunately humans seem to invariably choose the worst possible options and often that is the easiest option. But humans have always been their own destroyers as well. History shows this. To those who pay attention.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    @madeindex@mastodon.social @madeindex@lemmy.world basically it’s at best a pseudo science and anyone claiming otherwise doesn’t know much about psychology and they sure as hell don’t know anything about mental illness and most likely couldn’t even tell you the criteria of a single mental disorder (in anyway locale). Just like supposed lie detectors. Even if it was accurate sometimes that doesn’t mean it’s valid ‘science’.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •