Overview

I heard that you read my post about my web dev essay, and I would hope that you will continue reading and look at what I have to say in data science. Well, in that case enjoy learning about how machine learning can be flawed and my stance on that. The next posts will be about this topic, so make sure you like it. I am interested by machine learning, but it is still very confusing to me.

What was completed

The statement was: “Machine learning's focus on modelling human processes is fundamentally flawed and will only result in worse copies of what humans could already achieve.” I don’t fully agree with this as I believe that the quality is based on the creator. If they don’t understand math, then the AI won’t be either, this is because it needs data to be trained on and the creator needs to provide good samples. I would also say that currently, it is very easy to make it become worse than a human. But it isn’t because of design, just because of how much the person (or people) invested into making it good.

There are also things that AI can be good at, these are memory and processing speed. It may also be better to think about how they help humans, rather than compete with them. But this isn’t answering the question. I am currently amassed at how good they are, but from the parts that they are designed for. Some AI’s are specialised for certain purposes, and trying to compare it to what a person can do is not fair?

Reflection

Did you enjoy arguing your point?

It was enjoyable to argue my point that algorithms aren’t flawed, even with the time restriction. I liked how I could explain my point of view with some evidence. The main motivation was because it was an assessment and that if it wasn’t, less work would have been done. But I still would have shared my view, just it may be worse (length and quality). While it was interesting, I don’t want to do it often (just like most assessment types).

With more time, could the response be better?

I think that the time restraint wasn’t too big of an issue. Because if it was 10 minutes or some more, I would have still done a similar response, but it may have better proofing. To make a big impact, it would have to be a bigger time but then the expected outcome will be higher, so it isn’t really a good idea. Maybe because every class uses 1 hour, I am used to that time and there must be a reason for it.

What were you most proud of?

As mentioned above, I am proud of my essay. It may not be A-grade quality, but I did care about it and as such I believe that it is a good output. My research wasn’t that good and could be improved (also said that in web dev). But if given a choice to redo or keep, I would keep my current extended response (and it isn’t how bothered I am as the major factor). There are still things that I want to improve, but that doesn’t take away from my proudness of it.