Saving Lives with Tech Amid Syria’s Endless Civil War
wired.com
wired.com
In Google News (different device) I see stories about Yemen in the past day from USA Today, Reuters, the Guardian, the Irish Times, the Washington Post, and the New York Times. Most appear to mention the school bus bombing.
I admittedly don't know what makes the front page of printed news or goes into heavy rotation on TV news. I've been using news aggregators instead of any one publisher for a decade+.
What are the strategies to avoid or reduce false positives. I suppose the human observers are vetted? And the article suggests that there must be sufficient amount of sensor data for the likelihood to be big enough. However it fails to mention how many sensors and therefor data-points are collected.
Are there good resources on crowdsourcing data, ensuring certain quality of data, especially when it comes to limited data inputs?
Also, not sure if I'm not seeing well or if my adblocker is being too zealous, but I don't see any share buttons on the article. Not something I'd expect from Wired, or any media outlet these days.
Not saying what they are doing is bad, just the unabashed optimism / tech will save us all view of Wired magazine.
In this case, you can predict where people will evac to, and time your follow-up bombing flights to hit those areas before there's time to evacuate from them.
If you have any pride in what you’re doing, I see that as a problem. Maybe you’re helping, but we will never be sure if you’re making things worse.
Really the criticism I have is of Wired magazine’s article, and not even the article so much as their promotion. On twitter and other places, you’ll see stuff from them like “how AI is preventing bombing raids”. That kind of attitude to generate readership I find recklessness and dangerous.
Again thank you for all your efforts.