Facebook Now Using Natural Language Processing 66
An anonymous reader writes "Facebook has added a new type of story to its News Feed today: if more than one of your friends post about the same topic, and it has a Page on the social network, the posts will be grouped under a Posted About story, even if your friends don't explicitly tag the Page. It turns out Facebook is using natural language processing on status updates as well as the headlines of posted links to figure out if a topic mentioned has a corresponding Page, and then searches to see if your other friends have done so as well."
Back to Usenet? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
... until everybody who joined it discovered they need friends.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYqWabxYhSs [youtube.com]
7 friends posted about "Google." (Score:2)
I saw a bunch of posts mentioning Google being grouped together, which seemed silly.
Re: (Score:3)
I've yet to see it work well. It grouped a tonne of posts together that had wikipedia links for no reason other than wikipedia, and in another it gouped a bunch of posts together about australian electronic musician Tomas Ford together, then decided it was about Ford Motorcars (which apparently has deeply annoyed the somewhat anticorporate musician right off)
Natural language? (Score:5, Funny)
Now if Facebook could only get posters to actually post in some sort of readable "natural language."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
image replies (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:image replies (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, you want Facebook to become *more* like 4chan?
*shakes head*
Re: (Score:2)
You mean become less creepy?
I'm not sure Facebook would survive the loss of users that would occur if the level of discourse there was raised to that of 4chan.
Re: (Score:1)
You mean become less creepy?
Yeah, because Facebook is missing that non-creepy atmosphere that 4chan has. You know, that site that popularized such things as Pedobear and shitting dick nipples.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but Facebook is still creepier. You expect goofy kids and outcasts to do goofy things.
Nobody expects Facebook's level of creepiness. Until it's too late.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody expects Facebook's level of creepiness. Until it's too late.
I noticed the creepiness as well. Can't put my finger on it. You?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Now there's an opportunity... (Score:2)
Bonus points to whoever registers under the name Fruit Flies and goes on to like A Banana.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's beyond annoying- it will deter me from posting things I otherwise would, when the content is critical of the subject. Every time I tell my friends about the latest idiotic thing Sarah Palin [thefreedictionary.com] or Donald Trump [reference.com] say and why only an ignoramus could believe that, it'll link to their pages. I don't want those halfwits to get credited as being relevant just because I share a laugh with my friends, and I certainly don't want to be related to her even if only by hyperlink.
What would be reasonable is If possibly
Re: (Score:2)
psst... you're on LiveJournal.
Not NLP (Score:5, Insightful)
That makes it a keyword search. Natural Language Processing implies that it intelligently parses the text to locate the topic, this is Dumb Processing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A couple examples of completely inappropriate non-sequitur groupings:
Lost, but only sort of the TV show [googleusercontent.com]
Obama [googleusercontent.com], only [googleusercontent.com] not [googleusercontent.com].
These were gleaned from my own FB page over the last two days.
I really hate this 'feature'.
Unnatural Security? (Score:1)
LaTeX (Score:5, Insightful)
If I and several of my friends have a discussion about LaTeX, I wonder which page will it get associated with. Or vice versa.
May result in some amusing situations.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I think Amazon needs to tweak THEIR processing a little bit...
From my search for "Latex":
| "Sweet Dreams, Honey Bear: A Hand-Puppet Book"
Umm... yeah.
"the social network"? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's called a pronoun, moron.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it's not a pro-form, so it's not a pronoun. But it is an anaphora, which is probably what you meant. :-)
In any case, it's clearly referential and the antecedent is unambiguous, unless you're trolling. :p
Re: (Score:2)
When did facebook receive exclusive rights to that name? Just because a movie was made about it under that name does not mean there is no other social network on the planet...
You were referring to "the social network" but I can't quote the title of your message (well, not lazily, anyway).
Nobody said it was "THE" social network. The fragment "the social network" obviously refers back to the start of the sentence where Facebook is referenced as the subject. So, the fragment is saying that Facebook is a social network; which it is. Your whole post disregards context and makes an assumption based on disregarding that context. Are you a journalist?
Re: (Score:2)
this could go so wrong (Score:3)
Story: One toddler dead, another critical after house fire.
Ad: Burn, baby, burn!
The inevitability of inappropriateness... can ya feel it?
Free Press Release Distribution (Score:1)
Most Facebook users I know don't use anything resembling natural language.
One More (Score:2)
Reason to not use Facebook. Where is the assumption that I want to be grouped in with some off the cuff remark made by friend 1871. Who is that guy and why is he on my Facebook anyway? I should do some defriending soon.
Privacy? (Score:1)
Example: There are a lot of drug groups on Facebook and if I use my account to criticize drugs, what if the NLP accidently groups myself and my friends and tags our posts as "About Citizens for Legal Marijuana" or some such? The point isn't whether the AI makes mistakes, the point is, how does it know my posts ought to be About anything at