Grading using artificial intelligence

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Snow, very much appreciate the time you took. Other than that Mrs. Lincoln how was the play.

This should put a stop to all the lofty talk we've heard from people about how AI is going to be a game changer.

I'd be a poor data scientist if I didn't also point out this this is just my opinion. I could be wrong, and if so, it wouldn't be the first time I was proven wrong by someone more creative and intelligent than myself who found a new method of solving a difficult problem that changes the game for everyone. That said, I'd gladly wager a lot of money against it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I'd be a poor data scientist if I didn't also point out this this is just my opinion. I could be wrong, and if so, it wouldn't be the first time I was proven wrong by someone more creative and intelligent than myself who found a new method of solving a difficult problem that changes the game for everyone. That said, I'd gladly wager a lot of money against it.

Well, the GenaMint guy has posted here, let's see if he has a rebuttal. I'm very impressed though with the force of your arguments and the clarity with which you made them.

[maniac_73]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I'd be a poor data scientist if I didn't also point out this this is just my opinion. I could be wrong, and if so, it wouldn't be the first time I was proven wrong by someone more creative and intelligent than myself who found a new method of solving a difficult problem that changes the game for everyone. That said, I'd gladly wager a lot of money against it.

I think you are right. It technically can be done but the insane cost and resources to develop are not worth the ROI like Self Driving cars.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

I think you are right. It technically can be done but the insane cost and resources to develop are not worth the ROI like Self Driving cars.

Yes, you could definitely write algorithms that could assign grades to cards and detect alterations. I just don't think the output of such models would be even remotely accurate enough to be all that helpful or useful in the real world. Would be happy to engage in a discussion with the genamint guys if they wanted to offer a rebuttal though. Also worth noting is that there are other ML approaches that could be used, but they'd all be subject to the same challenges.

There's a reason why PSA isn't currently using this technology to grade cards though despite having made a significant investment in it several months ago.

My suspicion is that they're simply taking scans in high def and with other light spectrums like UV and writing software to detect card stock that glows in blacklight, and that fingerprints cards and runs them against their database of existing cards to see if they have a match. Then those cards can be flagged for further investigation by the grading team. But this isn't machine learning, and it's certainly not "AI". I suspect they're just being rather liberal with the term "AI grading" because it's a big buzzword these days and it sounds good in a marketing campaign.

[mrreality68]

I nominate Snowman to be the Official AI Representative of Net54baseball Forum!!!

Anyone want to 2nd the nomination

[hcv123]

I was guilty of loving and getting excited about the concept so much that I hadn't taken the time to understand it (nor would I have known even where to begin if I wanted to). Your explanation was an incredible, sad and necessary reality check. I suppose we'll see where things go from here.

[Case12]

Delete

[Case12]

Check out Malcom Gladwells book, 'Blink'. He wrote "The Tipping Point" also. He makes a good argument that scientific analysis is completely different from human analysis. And that even cursory expert human anaysis is almost always better and correct more often (key is expert).

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by mrreality68

I nominate Snowman to be the Official AI Representative of Net54baseball Forum!!!

Anyone want to 2nd the nomination

Second.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I'd be a poor data scientist if I didn't also point out this this is just my opinion. I could be wrong, and if so, it wouldn't be the first time I was proven wrong by someone more creative and intelligent than myself who found a new method of solving a difficult problem that changes the game for everyone. That said, I'd gladly wager a lot of money against it.

Agree with you. As you pointed out in your detailed narrative, there will always be a need for human involvement and input in regards to AI and ML, and that is the biggest problem with just turning everything over to machines and computers. The next generations don't bother learning about the actual details of how to do things without the machines/computers, so when something happens and you can't use them, the younger generations may not have the ability to maintain or fix things going forward because they've learned to just let the computers/machines do everything. As more and more baby boomers retire every day, we are losing experience and knowledge in many areas that the younger people aren't taking up. So say they do end up using AI/ML to eventually grade cards, after some time all the experienced human card graders who had been helping to maintain those automated gradings systems will have retired or passed. So what happens then if problems or issues occur requiring more human involvement, and there aren't really any experienced graders around?

And this is for everything when it comes to the younger generations, not just the grading of cards by machines. Just think how many times you've gone to a store and given a young cashier money, and if it wasn't for the register doing the calculation for them, they can't really figure out the proper change.