Comment by ed_mercer
Comment by ed_mercer 5 days ago
This was proven to be false on the WAN show. Only 20% of transactions were low confidence and handled by mechanical turk.
Comment by ed_mercer 5 days ago
This was proven to be false on the WAN show. Only 20% of transactions were low confidence and handled by mechanical turk.
One transaction per minute is nothing at all when the transaction can be as simple as "did the person put that back on the shelf" with a 5 seconds clip.
Hum, yes it does? It's not because it's not a complex action that it's necessarily supported by the models.
It's not hard to imagine edge scenarios for which the models aren't trained, like a customer dropping an item, or putting an item back in a random shelf instead of the one it's intended for, or someone picking up that previously randomly placed item, etc.
Proven "false." I've noticed that if one admits the truth with a dismissive or offended tone, you can just continue to claim the lie and through sheer force of will people will still go with it.
I think people just think that they must be misunderstanding something; that nobody could claim one thing while offering evidence of its opposite. 1/5 of purchases lose their significance.
Nothing has been "proven". The original story was The Information (paywalled article) reshared by Business Insider [1] and claimed that 70% of the transactions were reviewed by an indian. The source was an anonymous source.
Business Insider also reached out to Amazon at the time and a spokesperson denied that actually reviewed any transactions.
This "proven false" thing is just another anonymous source claiming that actually it was only 20%.
So you actually have no proof of anything, you just have three persons claiming three different things (0%, 20% and 70%).
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/amazons-just-walk-out-actual...
Transactions or grabs? Cuz I grab >5 things every time..so it stands to reason Indians always reviewed me.
20% seems like a "significant portion" to me