Showing posts with label computer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label computer. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 10, 2014

An IQ test for computers: does it tell us how smart the computer is, or how dumb humans are?

 A Russian computer fooled 33% of people who engaged in an online chat into thinking it was a thirteen-year-old boy who didn't speak English very well.  But really, how hard is it for a computer to fool the least-intelligent third of humans that it is one of them?

 

Computer program fools humans, allegedly passes Turing test

A team in Russia claims its chatbot managed to dupe more than 30 percent of human interrogators into believing it's human. Are they to be believed?
It wasn't Siri, nor a souped-up Scarlett Johansson.
However, it seems that artificial intelligence may have gone even further toward a time when it will fool us that it's just like us. Emphasis on the "may have."
A Russia-based team claims to be the first to create a program that passed the Turing test. Named after Alan Turing -- who died on June 7, 1954 -- the challenge is to persuade a minimum of 30 percent of humans that the computer program is a real person.
As the Independent reported, in tests conducted at the Royal Society in London, the Eugene Goostman program managed to persuade 33 percent of people that it was a 13-year-old boy from Odessa, Ukraine.
The event was organized by the University of Reading. The university insisted that this is the first time the Turing test has been passed with flying deception.
Professor Ken Warwick, a visiting professor at Reading, said in a press release: "Some will claim that the Test has already been passed. The words Turing Test have been applied to similar competitions around the world. However this event involved the most simultaneous comparison tests than ever before, was independently verified and, crucially, the conversations were unrestricted. A true Turing Test does not set the questions or topics prior to the conversations. We are therefore proud to declare that Alan Turing's Test was passed for the first time on Saturday."
There's a certain convenience in pretending you're a 13-year-old boy, of course. You can fool people more easily because, unlike IBM's Watson, you don't have to pretend you know everything. Rather you have to have a very well-designed "dialog controller."
The man behind the boy, Vladimir Veslov, explained: "This year we improved the 'dialog controller,' which makes the conversation far more human-like when compared to programs that just answer questions. Going forward we plan to make Eugene smarter and continue working on improving what we refer to as 'conversation logic'."

...Those who are gullible to such things, though, are often those who think nothing right now of sending an online date whom they have never met huge sums of money.
The woman who was duped into wiring $500,000 to someone she'd met on a Christian dating site is but one example.
It's true, though, that as AI progresses, we'll be forced to think at least twice when meeting "people" online...





That Computer Actually Got an F on the Turing Test


Alan M Turing and colleagues working on the Ferranti Mark I Computer in 1951. Photo: SSPL/Getty Images
Alan M Turing and colleagues working on the Ferranti Mark I Computer in 1951. Photo: SSPL/Getty Images
Over the weekend, a group of programmers claimed they built a program that passed the famous Turing Test, in which a computer tries to trick judges into believing that it is a human. According to news reports, this is a historic accomplishment. But is it really? And what does it mean for artificial intelligence?
The Turing Test has long been held as a landmark in machine learning. Its creator, British computer scientist Alan Turing, thought it would represent a point when computers would have brains nearly as capable as our own. But the value of the Turing Test in modern day computer science is questionable. And the actual accomplishments of the test-winning chatbot are not all that impressive.
The Turing Test 2014 competition was organized to mark the 60th anniversary of Turing’s death and included several celebrity judges, including actor Robert Llewellyn of the British sci-fi sitcom Red Dwarf. The winner was a program named Eugene Goostman, which managed to convince 10 out of 30 judges that it was a real boy. Goostman is the work of computer engineering team led by Russian Vladimir Veselov and Ukrainian Eugene Demchenko.
The program had a few built-in advantages, such as the fact that he was claimed to be a 13-year-old non-native English speaker from Ukraine. It also only tricked the judges about 30 percent of the time (an F minus, or so). For many artificial intelligence experts, this is less than exciting...

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Ed Brand wants to spend $4 million on iPads without training teachers on how to use them

You could pay for a lot of master teachers (see my plan) with $4 million. It's the teacher that makes the difference, not the expensive program imported from outside the district.

I enjoyed reading the comments section on this article.


The iPad Proposition
By Susan Luzzaro
San Diego Reader
Aug. 22, 2012

Last February, the Sweetwater Union High School District moved forward with a controversial initiative to buy 6300 iPads for its seventh-graders. The iPads cost $4.3 million. Several months later, the district purchased iPad covers, spending $27,000, and in July, learning-management software, costing $1.1 million over six years. The district faces a $27 million deficit. As the costly experiment with new technology unfolds, many question the district’s use of funds and planning to integrate iPads into the classroom.

Sweetwater began using iPads in a pilot program last November. A select group of Hilltop Middle School students were sold the devices. A current posting on the district’s website lauds the program: “Pilot programs such as the one being implemented at Hilltop Middle School in the Foreign Language and Global Studies (FLAGS) program have proven highly successful at engaging students and in raising academic achievement.”

Despite this claim, a public records request asking whether students’ grades had improved yielded this response: “The district does not have the requested information as this is not something we are tracking.”

Money for the iPads came from several sources, including $1.8 million from Proposition O construction bond money and $1.5 million from Mello-Roos funds. Mello-Roos is a special tax assessment paid by some California communities to fund infrastructure and construction of public facilities.

Many have argued that the money raised through construction bonds should not be spent on iPads. The use of Mello-Roos funds has also been criticized, as not all Sweetwater families pay Mello-Roos taxes.

Critics of Sweetwater’s iPad program claim the devices are offered to induce students to stay in the district rather than leave for charter schools. As school budgets continue to shrink, critics question where the money for iPads will come from next year and the year after.

Nick Marinovich, chair of the Proposition O Citizens’ Bond Oversight Committee, recently wrote to the district..."[W]e repeatedly asked the District to provide a comprehensive plan on how they would continue to fund iPads over the next five years as well as how they planned to measure their success,” he wrote. “...There was no apparent metrics to analyze the effectiveness of this investment.…”

Lack of planning has been a constant thread in the iPad discussion. Melanie, an English instructor who spoke on condition that only her first name be used, was part of the pilot program at Hilltop Middle School. She experienced a number of problems. She said that teachers received only two days of iPad instruction. “We had no training in how to effectively use the iPads in our own subjects,” Melanie said.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

School district settles in webcam privacy case

See previous post on this story.

October 12, 2010
School district settles in webcam privacy case
by Edward Moyer
CNET

The Philadelphia school district that was sued for remotely and secretly taking pictures of students in their homes, using webcams on laptops issued to the students, has agreed to pay $610,000 to settle the lawsuits.

The Lower Merion School District's Board of School Directors said in a statement today that it will pay $175,000 to plaintiff Blake Robbins and $10,000 to plaintiff Jalil Hassan. An additional $425,000 will be paid out to cover the plaintiffs' legal fees.

"We recognize that in this case, a lengthy, costly trial would benefit no one," the statement said. "It would have been an unfair distraction for our students and staff, and it would have cost taxpayers additional dollars that are better devoted to education. We also wanted to be sensitive to the welfare of the student involved in the case, given the possible ramifications of what would have been a highly publicized trial."

Earlier this year, lawyers for high schooler Robbins and his family sued the district, saying the 15-year-old had been photographed without his knowledge. In a later motion, they said thousands of shots had been taken, including "pictures of Blake partially undressed and of Blake sleeping." They also said images of visited Web sites and of instant messaging exchanges had been recorded. Hassan also sued, and the incident sparked an investigation by local law enforcement agencies and the FBI.

The district admitted webcams had been activated but said the remote photo-taking function had been put in place as a way of tracking stolen laptops. A judge eventually ruled that there was no evidence that would justify criminal charges in the case.

In August, the district approved revised laptop policies that "strictly prohibit remote monitoring...of any kind, including activation of webcams, screenshots, audio, and video."

Thursday, August 19, 2010

District loaned laptops to students, then used spyware to take pictures of them.

See update on this story.

Feds: No crime spying on kids via webcams
Prosecutors: No "criminal intent"
By Dan Gillmor

Federal prosecutors are showing uncommon sympathy for some Pennsylvania school officials who spied on students via webcams in their school-owned laptop computers: They've decided not to prosecute.

The reason? "For the government to prosecute a criminal case, it must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person charged acted with criminal intent," the U.S. Attorney's office said in a statement. "We have not found evidence that would establish beyond a reasonable doubt that anyone involved had criminal intent."

Let's leave aside the fact that people are charged all the time for criminal offenses despite having no idea they're committing crimes. And since when did ignorance of the law confer immunity?

Let's focus instead on the fundamental creepiness in what happened at the Lower Merion School District in suburban Philadelphia...

Thursday, February 18, 2010

School Allegedly Spied On Kids In Their Homes

Click HERE to see original complaint.


"I do trust that the school district knows its bounds."
--A Pennsylvania student who apparently hasn't read this blog or the many news articles, blogs and court cases about illegal behavior by the individuals in charge of our schools


Students'-eye view of Webcam spy case
by Larry Magid
CNET

Students at Herriton High School in Lower Merion School District near Philadelphia are given Apple MacBook laptops to use both at school and at home. Like all MacBooks, the ones issued to the students have a Webcam. And, in addition to the students' ability to use the Webcam to take pictures or video, the school district can also use it to take photographs of whomever is using the computer.

In a civil complaint (PDF) filed in federal court, a student at the school, Blake Robbins, said he received a notice from an assistant principal informing him that "the school district was of the belief that minor plaintiff was engaged in improper behavior in his home, and cited as evidence a photograph from the Webcam."

The district said in a statement that the "security feature was installed to help locate a laptop in the event it was reported lost, missing or stolen so that the laptop could be returned to the student." The district further explained that "upon a report of a suspected lost, stolen or missing laptop, the feature was activated by the district's security and technology departments. The tracking-security feature was limited to taking a still image of the operator and the operator's screen." The district claims it has "not used the tracking feature or Webcam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever."...

In the mean time, the Associated Press is reporting that the FBI is investigating the district and "will explore whether Lower Merion School District officials broke any federal wiretap or computer-intrusion laws," according to an unnamed official who spoke to the AP.

In an interview with CBS Evening News, plaintiff Blake Robbins said he was unaware that the camera could be activated at his house. "I thought that there was no way that they could do that at my home," Robbins said, adding that the assistant principal "thought I was selling drugs, which is completely false." ...




School Allegedly Spied On Kids In Their Homes

Web cams in laptops provided a school district with compromising photos of minors in their homes, a lawsuit claims.

By Thomas Claburn
InformationWeek
February 18, 2010 03:35 PM

A Pennsylvania family last week filed a lawsuit against the Lower Merion School District for spying on their child at home using a Web cam in a school-issued laptop.

The lawsuit, brought by Michael E. Robbins and Holly S. Robbins on behalf of their minor son Blake Robbins, alleges that the school district invaded their privacy and stolen private information in violation of various computer fraud and privacy laws.

The complaint claims that Lindy Matsko, assistant principal of Harriton High School, informed the Robbins' son that the School District believed he "was engaged in improper behavior in his home, and cited as evidence a photograph from the Web cam embedded in [his] personal laptop issued by the School District."

The complaint further states that Michael Robbins subsequently verified that the School District had the ability to remotely capture images using the Web cam at any time, without the knowledge or consent of the user.

"As the laptops at issue were routinely used by students and family members while at home, it is believed and therefore averred that many of the images captured and intercepted may consist of images of minors and their parents or friends in compromising or embarrassing positions, including, but not limited to, various stages or dress or undress," the complaint says...

Friday, August 28, 2009

Online education is more effective than classroom teaching


It's sad when a machine can do a better job than a college graduate. The problem is school districts are choosing the wrong college graduates in too many cases, and they're keeping the wrong people in the classroom. See evaluating teachers.


August 19, 2009
Study Finds That Online Education Beats the Classroom
By Steve Lohr
New York Times

A recent 93-page report on online education, conducted by SRI International for the Department of Education, has a starchy academic title, but a most intriguing conclusion: “On average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.”

The report examined the comparative research on online versus traditional classroom teaching from 1996 to 2008. Some of it was in K-12 settings, but most of the comparative studies were done in colleges and adult continuing-education programs of various kinds, from medical training to the military.

Over the 12-year span, the report found 99 studies in which there were quantitative comparisons of online and classroom performance for the same courses. The analysis for the Department of Education found that, on average, students doing some or all of the course online would rank in the 59th percentile in tested performance, compared with the average classroom student scoring in the 50th percentile. That is a modest but statistically meaningful difference.

“The study’s major significance lies in demonstrating that online learning today is not just better than nothing — it actually tends to be better than conventional instruction,” said Barbara Means, the study’s lead author and an educational psychologist at SRI International...