- cross-posted to:
- globalnews
- cross-posted to:
- globalnews
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/1386796
Archived version: https://archive.ph/F9saW
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230812233105/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-66472938
That, or they might have figured it out from her search patterns alone—like how Target figured out that one woman was gregnant before she did.
It was never proven that the baby was Greg’s.
Has this story ever been confirmed by Target directly? As this happened in America and her father was outraged about it, it would have been awfully convenient, to “blame” the algorithm for “discovering”, she was pregnant. It takes quite a data analyst to figure out trends before someone even knows they are pregnant. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out a pattern for someone if they know they are pregnant and are just hiding it from their dad.
Yes. It’s many years in my past, but this was confirmed. Target still does their targeting but now scatter unrelated items in the ads to hide what they know.
target still does their targeting
Awesome sentence
Preguntas
Pregante
They didn’t figure anything out. There’s no sentience in the algorithm, only the creators of said algorithm. It only chose content based on input. So it all revolves around the choices of the article’s author.
Same thing with the woman who was pregnant, the algorithm gave choices based on the user’s browsing history. It made the connection that the choice of product A was also chosen by pregnant mothers, therefore the shopper might be interested in product B which is something an expecting mother would buy.
Ugh, I was agreeing with you, and you go pedant. Come on, you should know “figure out” doesnt necessarily imply sentience. It can also be used synonymously with, “determine.”
Sorry, I misunderstood your tone. Apologize for going all pedantic…it’s a character flaw.
Removed by mod