Re:Soylent: Mechanical Turk for Microsoft Word
by 8ren on Saturday October 09, 2010 @07:50AM
(#1774863)
I've just been reading A Deepness in the Sky with its focussed zipheads, who provide human-level automation in the the Slow Zone. Only difference was that that was realtime.
Re:Soylent: Mechanical Turk for Microsoft Word
by ephermata on Saturday October 09, 2010 @05:30AM
(#1774750)
This is wacky beautiful. I look forward to the packaged precompiled plugin so I can try it out myself.
One thing that comes to mind -- it may not be that hard to overwhelm the Mechanical Turk tasks associated with Soylent to reach a situation where I see every single Soylent task from a single document. It's an interesting question to calculate how many people you would need, given the volume of Soylent usage.
The point is that if I control every single worker on your Soylent task, then I can lean a lot about your document. That in turn could lead to exciting conversations with your IT department.
Re:Soylent: Mechanical Turk for Microsoft Word
by po on Saturday October 09, 2010 @05:46AM
(#1774764)
Yeah this is definitely not for sensitive documents. Users have enough trouble already distinguishing between native and web applications, public and private, etc… Now you need to explain the difference between AI and non-AI computation.
Re:Soylent: Mechanical Turk for Microsoft Word
by fredpeters on Saturday October 09, 2010 @08:17AM
(#1774890)
I can not see how this could be efficient. The amount of time you would spend evaluating the different options and the cost of having the edits rejected would not add up.
So alternatively..
Find people you think are good by testing them. Hire them.
I would personally like a few editors that I could trust. This would sort out the privacy issues too. Is there such a service that manages these contracts? It seems like a good business idea.
Re:Soylent: Mechanical Turk for Microsoft Word
by daychilde on Saturday October 09, 2010 @12:53PM
(#1775293)
I nearly stopped - but it's the opinion of the blog writer. The video is not from the blog itself, and is definitely worth the watch.
But I agree - stupid things like 'Micro$oft' are a pet peeve of mine. I think people should use what they like and what works better for them. I personally use Windows and Linux, just for different things. And I've have a Mac box to play with if I wasn't broke.
So I suggest to anyone else who didn't watch the video - ignore the irritating blog author and check the video out. It's completely unrelated to the idiotic comment.
Paper: http://people.csail.mit.edu/msbernst/papers/soylent-uist2010...
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_miZqsPwsc
Code: http://code.google.com/p/soylent/
Slides: http://people.csail.mit.edu/msbernst/talks/soylent-uist2010....
Please try to link to original content for submissions.
What I'm trying to say is that this is creepy.
One thing that comes to mind -- it may not be that hard to overwhelm the Mechanical Turk tasks associated with Soylent to reach a situation where I see every single Soylent task from a single document. It's an interesting question to calculate how many people you would need, given the volume of Soylent usage.
The point is that if I control every single worker on your Soylent task, then I can lean a lot about your document. That in turn could lead to exciting conversations with your IT department.
http://mygengo.com/
So alternatively.. Find people you think are good by testing them. Hire them.
I would personally like a few editors that I could trust. This would sort out the privacy issues too. Is there such a service that manages these contracts? It seems like a good business idea.
But I agree - stupid things like 'Micro$oft' are a pet peeve of mine. I think people should use what they like and what works better for them. I personally use Windows and Linux, just for different things. And I've have a Mac box to play with if I wasn't broke.
So I suggest to anyone else who didn't watch the video - ignore the irritating blog author and check the video out. It's completely unrelated to the idiotic comment.