Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Now Using Natural Language Processing

Posted by timothy on from the skynet-enters-rem-sleep dept.

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."

41 of 66 comments (clear)

  1. Back to Usenet? by zmughal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, now that we can correlate what people are talking about to topics, can we get proper threading? The code doesn't work in some overloaded cases such as categorizing the phrase "Big Apple" under "Apple, Inc.".

    1. Re:Back to Usenet? by blackair · · Score: 1

      exactly, they need to allow people to explicitly tag the item if they want it to a useful design feature

  2. 7 friends posted about "Google." by crow · · Score: 1

    I saw a bunch of posts mentioning Google being grouped together, which seemed silly.

    1. Re:7 friends posted about "Google." by sg_oneill · · Score: 2

      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)

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
  3. Re:Who uses FB anymore anyway? by zmughal · · Score: 1

    Frozen Bubble.

  4. Natural language? by Hamster+Lover · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now if Facebook could only get posters to actually post in some sort of readable "natural language."

    1. Re:Natural language? by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      That's going to be offered when FB merges with Microsoft later this year. Among the benefits for users will be automatic red squiggly lines under 68.4% of their words, and a compulsory AI comic book character (licensed from Marvel) to offer timely wording suggestions, like "it's clobberin' time" and "my spider-sense is tingling!".

    2. Re:Natural language? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      That'd be AWESOME!

      Just imagine it: when 30+% of your words are misspelled you hear "You're making me angry..", then at 50+% you hear very loudly "HULK SMASH!!11", and Hulk goes on a rige-induced violent rampage, destroying first your UI elements, then actual installed applications and games, then all of your files.. you'd better be a really fast learner and start fixing those misspellings or your PC wouldn't be useable for long!

  5. image replies by Lehk228 · · Score: 2

    can Zuckerberg pull his hands out of his ass for a few minutes and allow image replies to posts? every bbcode html and *chan board has been able to do so since forever

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    1. Re:image replies by Trogre · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wait, you want Facebook to become *more* like 4chan?

      *shakes head*

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    2. Re:image replies by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Wait, you want Facebook to become *more* like 4chan?

      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.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:image replies by esquizoide · · Score: 1

      I think it's already implemented. If I post a link to an image as a reply, facebook shows me a nice thumbnail.

    4. Re:image replies by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      You have to admit, it would be a lot more interesting. Soccer moms meet /b/ - the possibilities are endless.

    5. Re:image replies by Rizimar · · Score: 1

      Wait, you want Facebook to become *more* like 4chan?

      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.

    6. Re:image replies by 228e2 · · Score: 1

      You actually can image reply in a post. They just use some sort of iframe.

      --
      Since when does being a Socialist mean 'someone who has a different opinion than me'?
    7. Re:image replies by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      You know, that site that popularized such things as Pedobear and shitting dick nipples.

      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.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:image replies by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      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?

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    9. Re:image replies by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I think it has something to do with other people.

      I'm looking into a system similar to Facebook, but which works offline. I think that's the solution. No need for the network layer at all.

      I think it's called a "diary".

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  6. Now there's an opportunity... by Bogtha · · Score: 1

    Bonus points to whoever registers under the name Fruit Flies and goes on to like A Banana.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    1. Re:Now there's an opportunity... by Yuke!Yuke!Marina · · Score: 1

      Time Flies- likes An Arrow

  7. Not NLP by Psycizo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Facebook told Inside Facebook that its natural language processing doesn’t detect sentiment, how a Page’s name is being used, or whether the mentioned Page was actually the focus of the update. Page owners may not like Facebook linking to their Page if a post isn’t actually what a user was discussing or if it is being talked about negatively.

    That makes it a keyword search. Natural Language Processing implies that it intelligently parses the text to locate the topic, this is Dumb Processing.

    1. Re:Not NLP by 19061969 · · Score: 1

      Except when dealing with synonyms. A page which uses only the word 'cars' to refer to cars will not be matched to a page that only uses the word 'automobiles' to refer to cars with keyword search. I'm not saying FB does this but synonymy is a well known problem (with solutions) in information retrieval.

      --
      bang goes my karma... again...
    2. Re:Not NLP by TheRedSeven · · Score: 1

      Good Lord, it's awful.

      A couple examples of completely inappropriate non-sequitur groupings:
      Lost, but only sort of the TV show
      Obama, only not.

      These were gleaned from my own FB page over the last two days.

      I really hate this 'feature'.

  8. Unnatural Security? by cabbi · · Score: 1

    Anyone know why Facebook removed the default https security setting? Logging on is now insecure by default. You have to dig into your configuration options to reactivate it. Whats up with that?

  9. LaTeX by lahvak · · Score: 4, 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.

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:LaTeX by mosseh · · Score: 1

      Yeah, try searching for LaTeX (books) on Amazon. That must have caused some serious aggravation for non-techies.

    2. Re:LaTeX by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      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.

  10. "the social network"? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    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...

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:"the social network"? by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      It's called a pronoun, moron.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    2. Re:"the social network"? by Psychotria · · Score: 1

      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?

    3. Re:"the social network"? by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      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

    4. Re:"the social network"? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      And I'm wondering why "Page" is capitalised throughout. Has Facebook trademarked the word "Page"? Is a Facebook "Page" different to any other web page?

  11. this could go so wrong by PJ6 · · Score: 2

    There are a lot of existing examples

    Story: One toddler dead, another critical after house fire.
    Ad: Burn, baby, burn!

    The inevitability of inappropriateness... can ya feel it?

  12. Re:Who uses FB anymore anyway? by meowris · · Score: 1

    A lot of people...? Or am I in a different universe?

  13. Re:Who uses FB anymore anyway? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    ... until everybody who joined it discovered they need friends.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  14. Re:emo by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    psst... you're on LiveJournal.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  15. Free Press Release Distribution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Most Facebook users I know don't use anything resembling natural language.

  16. Re:Who uses FB anymore anyway? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Daniel Ellsberg, Former State and Defense Dept. Official on Facebook and FBI :)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYqWabxYhSs

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  17. One More by Hamfist · · Score: 1

    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.

  18. Re:Not a win by Monchanger · · Score: 1

    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 or Donald Trump 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-related-pages were recommended to me, where I could choose to link to a page of my choosing. I'd be glad to have that ability (as well as the option not to use it). This is of course regardless of who is implementing it- I wouldn't want Google forcing unwanted semantics on my content either. Luckily, Google at least recognizes that my content is actually mine, so there's some hope there.

  19. Privacy? by xyourfacekillerx · · Score: 1

    How am I the only person upset about the issue at hand here? I don't want my posts being associated with any person, topic, or page, unless I INTEND for that to happen.

    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 all? This should be a user choice, not something Facebook bots arbitrarily determine. Now I should worry that mention of a book might become implied endorsement of some big-budget summer movie on my part? This is ridiculous, I don't ever think Google+ will take over social networking, but Facebook keeps this up and sure enough people WILL leave.