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
[–] 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
    •