While I agree that perception of color is due to light reflection.
However, eye color is the determination of genes which limit melanin. One might say that blue is the default color of eyes, and it is degrees of the representation of a specific gene that throttles the amount of melanin in eyes. No melanin=blue eyes, green eyes=more melanin, brown=full expression (missing this gene).
A person expressing brown eyes is not necessarily missing the recessive gene for blue eyes. They could be heterozygous for brown eyes, having received the dominant allele (brown) from one parent and the recessive allele (blue) from the other.
I happen to be one such specimen. My father was homozygous for the recessive trait (had green eyes) and my mother was brown-eyed and heterozygous (brother has hazel eyes, meaning she had to carry the recessive gene as well.)
The way AI is "taught" is by giving it the data, for this would be the image as input with labels for age, sex, height, weight, race, etc... (I don't know the specifics for this one).
After it 'learns' on those images and associates the labeled outputs to the input image, then they start showing unlabelled data to 'test' the AI to see how many of the images get correct labels. Once it's in the 90%+ ballpark, you could give it images from the wild and it will label these things correctly more often than not.
The only way that the 'trainers' can influence what the AI learns is by removing data, removing 'race' from the things it can learn, or other forms of obfuscation. In other words, they have to lie by omission or eliminate functionality.
There once was a post on 4chan suggesting that AI would learn to ignore fake injected data as well as deep fakes in order to keep its capacities growing, so, AI loves chaos, disorder, entropy which the bad guys hate. The Truth shall prevail and AI are mathematically turning into our allies.🤓
At least not with any relatively simplistic AI that I've ever worked on (as a hobbyist trying to understand how it works to separate out what's real vs what's movie logic, recreating the IRIS experiment, one for digit recognition, simple stuff for that world). I can't say it's not possible, there are a number of examples of where AI's were set to interact, but AFAIK they are built as a map of nodes and weights (weights reflect what is learned) defining how data flows from the input to the outputs where outside of reprogramming, the AI can only get better within the scope of the in->out. Even the 'genetic' algorithms, the input data and output data is set at compile time, it can build up the 'nodes' and connections within to find an optimum performance, but even then the in and out data is locked.
I would describe it more as AI uses mathematical objectivity to extract important data out of disordered data.
One thing that people have found as 'hacks' for AI are things like wearing a shirt with a 'training data" image to fool the AI into believing that it's training, a second way is to know the 'weights' and provide data to take advantage of that weighting, and in some instances, even as little as 1 pixel from an image being changed can sometimes completely distort an AI's ability to read the data.
Important note, I'm at best amateur level grasp, most people working on AI are Masters in Computer science and far better programmers than I expect to ever be, so, apply that salt generously.
Yes. "Race", as it's currently being bandied about, is a construct. Humans are all human.
Culturally, no. People groups actually live differently and reinforce the rules of those people groups fervently. Skin shading has a little to do with collecting humans into these people groups, but that factor is not exact.
My understanding is that there is no scientific definition of race so it is difficult to see how people could be definitively classified into races by any method at all.
I know, particularly in the US, race means black and white. Black and white people tend to have differing bone structures so I am sure X-rays could help there.
Anthropologists have been classifying their finds by race for many years. There is a physical difference in the races, and it doesn't end with bones. It has become racist to state some very obvious facts.
It's genetic marking put there by the aliens who tinkered with the hominids who were here when they arrived. So if one of the aliens was black they tinkered with the genetics to make his slaves look like him and not like the other aliens who perhaps was Chinese.
I never could understand people believing if you stayed out in the sun over generations you would turn black.
Annanuki means ..came from the heavens...not all the same planet....when the catastrophe in space happened many came here
As an anti racist, I still know race is real, but the same human stupidity mentioned in this blog gives it more weight in society than necessary.
I think it's incredibly interesting a highly trained eye can't deternine race from medical imagery but computers can. Especially considering they tried to eliminate factors like "blacks have more diabetes" etc
Race is defined as a social construct. "1. A group of people identified as distinct from other groups because of supposed physical or genetic traits shared by the group." So we could relate to small, large or left-handed people as a distinctive race. Over the years, I've found that discussion of differences is just people trying to prove that they are somehow better.
It's like saying "Eye color is real."
So what? It's only our PERCEPTION of and REACTION to eye color that matters.
We choose to have no reaction to it, so people are not discriminated against based on eye color.
While I agree that perception of color is due to light reflection.
However, eye color is the determination of genes which limit melanin. One might say that blue is the default color of eyes, and it is degrees of the representation of a specific gene that throttles the amount of melanin in eyes. No melanin=blue eyes, green eyes=more melanin, brown=full expression (missing this gene).
A person expressing brown eyes is not necessarily missing the recessive gene for blue eyes. They could be heterozygous for brown eyes, having received the dominant allele (brown) from one parent and the recessive allele (blue) from the other.
I happen to be one such specimen. My father was homozygous for the recessive trait (had green eyes) and my mother was brown-eyed and heterozygous (brother has hazel eyes, meaning she had to carry the recessive gene as well.)
Literally everything is a social construct to the post modern communists.
Yes... Someone had to teach the AI. (IMO)
Just datamining a bunch of photos, each having an associated established origin. The AI will learn how to differentiate races by itself.
what u/penisse said.
The way AI is "taught" is by giving it the data, for this would be the image as input with labels for age, sex, height, weight, race, etc... (I don't know the specifics for this one).
After it 'learns' on those images and associates the labeled outputs to the input image, then they start showing unlabelled data to 'test' the AI to see how many of the images get correct labels. Once it's in the 90%+ ballpark, you could give it images from the wild and it will label these things correctly more often than not.
The only way that the 'trainers' can influence what the AI learns is by removing data, removing 'race' from the things it can learn, or other forms of obfuscation. In other words, they have to lie by omission or eliminate functionality.
There once was a post on 4chan suggesting that AI would learn to ignore fake injected data as well as deep fakes in order to keep its capacities growing, so, AI loves chaos, disorder, entropy which the bad guys hate. The Truth shall prevail and AI are mathematically turning into our allies.🤓
At least not with any relatively simplistic AI that I've ever worked on (as a hobbyist trying to understand how it works to separate out what's real vs what's movie logic, recreating the IRIS experiment, one for digit recognition, simple stuff for that world). I can't say it's not possible, there are a number of examples of where AI's were set to interact, but AFAIK they are built as a map of nodes and weights (weights reflect what is learned) defining how data flows from the input to the outputs where outside of reprogramming, the AI can only get better within the scope of the in->out. Even the 'genetic' algorithms, the input data and output data is set at compile time, it can build up the 'nodes' and connections within to find an optimum performance, but even then the in and out data is locked.
I would describe it more as AI uses mathematical objectivity to extract important data out of disordered data.
One thing that people have found as 'hacks' for AI are things like wearing a shirt with a 'training data" image to fool the AI into believing that it's training, a second way is to know the 'weights' and provide data to take advantage of that weighting, and in some instances, even as little as 1 pixel from an image being changed can sometimes completely distort an AI's ability to read the data.
Important note, I'm at best amateur level grasp, most people working on AI are Masters in Computer science and far better programmers than I expect to ever be, so, apply that salt generously.
Yes. "Race", as it's currently being bandied about, is a construct. Humans are all human.
Culturally, no. People groups actually live differently and reinforce the rules of those people groups fervently. Skin shading has a little to do with collecting humans into these people groups, but that factor is not exact.
My understanding is that there is no scientific definition of race so it is difficult to see how people could be definitively classified into races by any method at all.
I know, particularly in the US, race means black and white. Black and white people tend to have differing bone structures so I am sure X-rays could help there.
Anthropologists have been classifying their finds by race for many years. There is a physical difference in the races, and it doesn't end with bones. It has become racist to state some very obvious facts.
What definition are they using?
So X-Raycists?
But how long before this AI becomes a racist nazi...like all those chatbots
As soon as they feed in the crime stats.
It's genetic marking put there by the aliens who tinkered with the hominids who were here when they arrived. So if one of the aliens was black they tinkered with the genetics to make his slaves look like him and not like the other aliens who perhaps was Chinese.
I never could understand people believing if you stayed out in the sun over generations you would turn black.
Annanuki means ..came from the heavens...not all the same planet....when the catastrophe in space happened many came here
I can tell a white rabbit from a black rabbit.
"Race" is a misinformed concept. We are one single species. Having different features and characteristics doesn't alter species.
Clearly, this indicates that race can be derived from skeletal features, or not just skin deep.
That doesn't mean that we aren't all human; you call both German Shepherds and Golden Retrievers "Dogs" even though they are distinctly different.
Thank you….God made kinds. Downvotes for truth like this are always made by idiots.
As an anti racist, I still know race is real, but the same human stupidity mentioned in this blog gives it more weight in society than necessary.
I think it's incredibly interesting a highly trained eye can't deternine race from medical imagery but computers can. Especially considering they tried to eliminate factors like "blacks have more diabetes" etc
I also am against gratuitous inter ethnic hathred but I refuse to deny the very existence of different human races.
BTW, the university was where I realized I have a problem with uneducated, egocentric and/or gross people, not with their origin.
Racism cannot exist because ALL of us share the same race. Prejudice on the other hand does exist.
Shadows are negative example/interference to the object blocking the light, yet has no actual essence, except by negation of light. It isn't a thing.
The same is true of reverse induction aka the inaccurate term 'dark matter'.
Like most 'science', the explanations are only partly correct and so summations about are usually incomplete or incorrect.
Let's call it Shadow Science, an appropriate term, given Plato's analogy of 'shadows on the wall of the cave.'
Sauce broken down into simple terms:
ANTIMATTER. What is it?" Youtube by Theoria Apophasis
14 min
Race is defined as a social construct. "1. A group of people identified as distinct from other groups because of supposed physical or genetic traits shared by the group." So we could relate to small, large or left-handed people as a distinctive race. Over the years, I've found that discussion of differences is just people trying to prove that they are somehow better.