31 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2018
    1. Advances in AI are used to spot signs of sexuality

      Speaking of crap detection, I also don't see an obvious author on this article. I feel prompted to further research this web page.

    2. Spouses might seek to know what sexuality-inferring software says about their partner (the word “gay” is 10% more likely to complete searches that begin “Is my husband…” than the word “cheating”). In parts of the world where being gay is socially unacceptable, or illegal, such software could pose a serious threat to safety. Dr Kosinski is at pains to make clear that he has invented no new technology, merely bolted together software and data that are readily available to anyone with an internet connection.

      Rheingold would agree that this is nothing new. The web makes information all the more accessible, and of course, it can be used to create hoaxes, fraudulent claims, and even manipulate or threaten people. Crap detection is extremely important in being able to discern the good and bad parts of the internet in order to protect yourself.

    3. The 91% accuracy rate only applies when one of the two men whose images are shown is known to be gay. Outside the lab the accuracy rate would be much lower. To demonstrate this weakness, the researchers selected 1,000 men at random with at least five photographs, but in a ratio of gay to straight that more accurately reflects the real world; approximately seven in every 100.

      So, the AI system is not as efficient as it is presented to be because it only has 91% accuracy when it has a 50% chance of getting the answer of who is more likely to be gay correct. But, in a realistic situation where sexuality is more fluid, and a smaller fraction of the population is known to be LGBTQ, it would be harder to pinpoint who is actually gay or straight. I also believe that this research is slightly bias to the social expectation of what gay and straight appears to be.

    4. images from a dating site are likely to be particularly revealing of sexual orientation.

      What does this statement exactly mean? Does it mean that one can easily assume the sexuality of a person on a dating site by the way he or she present themselves?

    5. , the program was found to pay most attention to the nose, eyes, eyebrows, cheeks, hairline and chin for determining male sexuality; the nose, mouth corners, hair and neckline were more important for women

      My understanding from reading the text is that these techniques rely more on social engineering than genetic makeup. For example, I presume it means that women who appear to have more male hormones are more likely to be attracted to women.

    6. As fetuses develop in the womb, they are exposed to various levels of hormones, in particular testosterone. These are known to play a role in developing facial structures, and may similarly be involved in determining sexuality.

      What I get from this is that the level of testosterone and estrogen (hormones) plays a role in determining the sexuality of a person, but I disagree slightly because any sexuality is not attached to any particular sex.

    7. The next step was to use a simple predictive model, known as logistic regression, to find correlations between the features of those faceprints and their owners’ sexuality (as declared on the dating website).

      This process of logistic regression is just advanced research like crap detection.The software studies which face structures are correlated to which sexualities and then makes guesses on entirely new data based on the correlations it studied and concluded from that. The sfotware determines what sexuality is more likely just as researchers do with their sources.

    8. Just because humans are unable to see the signs in faces does not mean that machines cannot do so.

      I think Rheingold might have disagreed with this statement. Its possible that if people were as exposed to the information (on faces) that artificial intelligence harbored, people could also be better at determining signs about a person just from their face. After all, research is all about analyzing multiple pieces of information, and being exposed to a plethora of information is definitely an advantage in that.

    9. which spits out a long string of numbers to represent each person; their “faceprint”.

      I highlighted this to point out that grammar is a part of crap detection because proof reading and peer review is one of the most significant parts of publishing a scholarly article. I don't think this sentence is grammatically correct because semicolons are usually used to separate two independent clauses.

    10. a Google system can make precise guesses about the year a photograph was taken, simply because it has seen more photos than a human could ever inspect, and has spotted patterns that no human could.

      I feel like this is the foundation of crap detection. When researching and analyzing a claim, one can only make "precise guesses" about the information based on information of other sources about the claim and about another source. Like I mentioned before and like Rheingold said, determining the credibility of a source isn't black or white but rather a measure of the degree to the researcher believes its accurate. Like the google system, people can also make infers about a claim or source based on patterns in other sources.

    11. MODERN artificial intelligence is much feted. But its talents boil down to a superhuman ability to spot patterns in large volumes of data.

      Even though this quote is describing the process of artificial intelligence, I think it indirectly describes the process that researchers should perform while filtering through online sources which Rheingold discussed and called crap detection. Although we may be no where near the capability of artificial intelligence, spotting patterns matters immensely when determining which sources are more or less reliable. When patterns are spotted, researchers can also use a technique called triangulating which helps support the credibility of sources and their claims.

    12. Advances in AI are used to spot signs of sexuality

      I will make 10 annotations on this article in connection with Rheingold's Crap Detection Chapter 2

  2. Feb 2018
    1. Birds like on the corners of Tom’s panel

      This is just a note to remind Ms. Rose that Jordan S. couldn't do my peer review because I didn't start my PSD 1 yet.

    2. The planes represent toms love for flying and the hope that Tom is still flying in heaven, spreading his radiance and love.

      I also made a similar interpretation in my panel which had a kite flying in the sky instead of an airplane. I interpreted that it could symbolize words of encouragement.

    3. Airplane makes me wonder how he was related to planes, what his job was.

      I agree. I believe his career or hobby could be related to flying planes because the plane seems to be a more significant part of the panel, and I can't think of any other reason it would be there. However, there is also a British flag (I think) on the airplane. Was he in the military? Is he British?

    4. Panel has a sun, clouds and airplane making me feel the panel is supposed to be set in the air. Bon Voyage Tom gives a feeling of a positive, airborne send off. Birds in the four corners give an even more airborne feel.

      The panel I'm working on is very similar being that it's set in the air and has the theme of a sky. Is the sky theme a common theme? It might be considering that it has a very bittersweet vibe to it.

    5. three cotton pieces could represent the three entities needed to pass along the aids virus. Two pieces representing the two people needed, as well as one piece representing the virus being passed along.

      This is a very unique point of view. I would've never thought about that deep symbolism being a possible interpretation of the panel.

    6. also could represent clouds over his life.

      I like that you used the word "could" here. It clarifies that the connection you made is only a possibility and opens up space to more interpretation.

    7. It is created colorful and bright as that is the impact that those who knew Tom believed that he made.

      This is a good connection, but I think you should use words like "could be" when analyzing the reason behind your observations.

    8. This was created in 2005 when Tom Bado died from AIDS.

      I like the small background information you gave. It would be helpful to those who aren't already acquainted with this project.

    1. There is also a concern with how objects “move” between domains and different value systems as the practices and meanings surrounding physically changing objects themselves change.

      This is a notable attribute that I didn't think of before. While studying material culture, I could consider the change in value that an object has over time and why it has occurred. More often since the world continues to progress and advance, many thing things become inept, like mp3 players and flip phones.

    2. It was only with the start of ethnographic fieldwork that the study of the material culture became less important. This bibliography of material culture will not focus primarily upon the study of ethnographic museums (with the exception of the section on Display) but more on the so-called new material culture studies that have developed since the 1980s and that are characterized by combining ethnographic fieldwork and anthropological debate

      Throughout reading both Haltman and Woodward, I noticed the similarities between an ethnography and the study of material culture.However, I believe there are weaknesses in the idea that existing people or active people need to be present in order to make an ethnography. They are similar in observing, describing, and analyzing something (an object or space) to deduce something about a culture.

    3. much work within material culture studies is critical of the idea that objects merely symbolize or represent aspects of a pre-existing culture or identity. A key area of contestation in the literature on material culture is the question of agency and the ways in which objects can produce particular effects or allow and permit certain behaviors or cultural practices.

      I can presume that much of the way historical artifacts are studied are a part of the study of material culture. Many ideas about a pre-existing culture can be uncovered or inferred by investigating artifacts which are material culture. When the author, Sophie Woodward, uses the word "agency," I think she means the conscious actions and thought processes that the creators had while making the material. That's definitely important in defining cultural differences, and because of cultural differences, objects do impact societies completely differently, large and small.

    4. It also challenges the assumption, perpetuated by disciplinary divisions and also philosophical trajectories, that the object and subject are separate, wherein the latter is assumed to be immaterial, and the former is assumed to be inert and passive.

      This is entirely what material culture is about. Materials are not just meaningless objects. In a sense, they are alive. They hold historical significance that carries truths about a a people or place that we otherwise would not be able to understand without that material object. Knowing more about the physical aspect of a material object can open up our understanding to underlying layers that we could not see on the tangible surface.

    5. It challenges the historical division between the natural sciences as being the place for the study of the material world and the social sciences as being where society and social relations can be understood.

      Material culture is definitely a fusion of natural science and social science. It's an analysis of how these two sciences interact and make sense together. "Why this material?" can answer questions both about the physical (practical) and social side of a culture.

  3. Jan 2018
    1. We see articulation and deduce patterns of use; we see interaction and deduce relationship; we see expression and deduce reception.

      I feel like this breaks down the process of analysis perfectly. It shows the relationship that observations have with conclusions. These are questions and answers that we should be asking and looking for to simplify our understanding of our subject.

    2. we do not analyze objects; we analyze our descriptions of objects●writing constitutesanalysis: we do not really see with clarity what we have not said that we have seen

      It's an interesting view that we can't necessarily analyze something we haven't "written." I think the author really means "think about deeply" when he says, "writing." Writing is kind of a deeper form of thought or speech because it takes more time and energy to form thoughts into words that make sense. It could have to do with how busy and abstract our minds are. It reminds me of how my last English teacher explained that witness accounts in court are many times blurred because our memory isn't as great as we think it is. If I am not thinking about something purposely, cautiously, or consciously, I probably haven't thought about it enough to be able to analyze it. Writing puts that all into perspective.

    3. information can be almost as bad as too little, anything left out of description is lost to interpretation forever. The longer and harder one looks, the better one sees; the better one sees, the subtler the connections one finds oneself able to make.

      I see many connections to outside knowledge in this reading. In critical thinking, the instructor taught the class to always give more information about an argument than less. It was our job as critical thinkers to translate "emotionally-charged" language into unbiased language in order to solve arguments logically. Both of these combinations allowed us to depict a logical argument which is similar here with descriptions depicting non-emotionally-charged language.

    4. Rather than saying what a visual image means, description tells us houran image has opened itself up to an interpretation.”

      Description is an unbiased form of explanation using the five senses. Interpretation is the impression something (concept, action, etc.) has on an individual (basically an opinion because interpretation is subjective). If someone tells you their impression of something without explaining what that something is without including their opinion, your interpretation of that thing is at the mercy of their impression. However, if only the description was presented to you, you would be at a better advantage to create your own interpretation without the corruption of someone else's. I think that is what Haltman is explaining when he says, "description...has opened itself up to an interpretation."

    5. The key to good description is a rich, nuanced vocabulary. Technically accurate language (nominative, for the most part) plays an important role in this, but ultimately not the most important role which is reserved, perhaps somewhat counter-intuitively, to descriptive modifiers (adjectives) and, most crucially, to terms expressive of the dynamics of interrelation (verbs, adverbs, prepositions). Only active verbs and descriptive prose cast in an active voice serve to establish cause and agency. As a means to this end, avoiding the verb to be (in all its forms: is, are, there is, there are) will help to make visible thematically-charged spatial and functional complexities otherwise flattened or obscured.

      Haltman is discussing the importance of concise language here. Concise language is vital to description because it is a large part of the process of translating an image into words in order to interpret it as accurately as possible. In most English classes, we're taught to avoid using "to be" verbs such as the ones stated because they do, in fact, cause obscurity and result with less dimension. For example, instead of saying "he went to the store," someone could say, "he raced to the store." The latter description creates a clearer vision in one's mind to understand more precisely what is being described.

    6. While only some of culture takes material form, the part that does records the shape and imprint of otherwise more abstract, conceptual, or even metaphysical aspects of that culture that they quite literally embody.

      Cultural relativism exists in all aspects of life. As learned in Ethics, cultural relativism is about the differences in values, practices, etc. among cultures, and I feel that is a large part of my understanding in this text. In this case, though, material objects are being discussed, and this statement explains that these objects which seem to have one or a simple purpose are all relative to culture and determine significant differences in every culture's structure whether it be social, political, or economic.