> while the device, using AI, tracks the child’s eye movements
Sure do wish that people would just stop blindly reprinting a company's claims of AI use, without asking what exactly they mean.
Like, rad as hell if this works. But when they say AI, do they just mean an algorithm? At this point, the term has become virtually meaningless, almost becoming synonymous with "computer technology".
I remember reading about something like this way before the current AI craze.
Didn't seem that complicated or at least that was the way it was explained, just a matter of checking whether the child was looking more at faces, eyes or objects. Does seem like something some AI could do.
Statewide school system buys tech.
Any kids 'not performing' are subject to tech without parental consent.
Tech positively 'diagnoses' child with 'autism'.
Child is put in 'special' learning stream and referred to state doctors for prescription medication.
Medication messes up kid due to mismatch with referred diagnosis.
Kid drops out of school.
State has records on kids 'disability' which bars kid from obtaining driving licence and other professional licenses.
The point is that the 'tech' removes the long and expensive 'proper' medical diagnosis that is currently required in any reasonable system. It is replaced by a set of commercially validated parameters that have not necessarily been tested.
AI is as dangerous as poorly trained corrupt doctors in league with corrupt officials.
Sure do wish that people would just stop blindly reprinting a company's claims of AI use, without asking what exactly they mean.
Like, rad as hell if this works. But when they say AI, do they just mean an algorithm? At this point, the term has become virtually meaningless, almost becoming synonymous with "computer technology".