Just had 2 reviews in a row…
“My Home”
Picture of someones front room.
“Streets of Chaos”
Picture of a “spiky cucumber”
How are these getting through AI?
1 Like
Moving this to general.
And that is a good question as to why they haven’t been auto rejected.
1 Like
AI (or ML, wich is even dumber AI) doesnt “know” anything.
It has set info on what it has to reject. It doesn’t really understand words. So those are two very unusual nominations wich ML has no previous knowledge of, and therefore doesn’t “know” how to handle those and passes them to reviewers.
ML isn’t smart at all. It Auto-rejects benches in bulk, just because most of them have been rejected in the past, and so it has a connection af bench=bad.
It shouldn’t do this, as some benches can be good wayspots (artistic value, part of a hike trail, scenic view), but it learned from user behavior, and therefore sees that 99% of benches got rejected, so it rejects them when it sees them. It can not “consider” anything, it can just compare nominations to things it has “learned” and act according to the Data it has been fed.
So no real ML issue here, just something that’s too unique for it to recognize and therefore we as users have to decide. Things that are laughably easy for humans can be really hard for ML/AI, but things that are extremely hard for humans can be easy for AI/ML. Its just how those systems work.
4 Likes
Most benches don’t meet criteria, and this is outlined in the Criteria Clarification Collection for seating benches, as well as for picnic tables/areas. A bench that is part of a hiking trail is ineligible per the clarification, but unique artistic benches and ones in front of scenic viewpoints are, but it’s how the nomination is done that’s important. Not showing the viewpoint in the photos or nominating a mass-produced bench that has artistic details are more likely to be rejected.
Many have actually been noticing some changes to ML, that it is rejecting things that many reviewers in the area typically do reject, such as neighborhood/apartment complex signs, which usually are just advertisements for the homes there. We get a good deal of these in the US, and some of us have noticed a decrease, as ML is starting to learn from us that they aren’t distinct and rejecting them.
Of course, these cases are a little different, as most do not submit abusive nominations. There are many businesses with “home” in their titles, so that it’s going to necessarily be an auto-reject word. What if there as a local restaurant called “Down Home Diner” or “Home Town Tavern,” for example? These may be eligible to be Wayspots, even with the word “home” in the title. And a room in a home could look like a lounge area or a community room, which is another issue that makes it hard for ML to tell what exactly it is.
The spiky cucumber one, with that title, could be seen as an art piece by ML. Just doing a search for spiky cucumber does bring up info on what it is, a cucumber with spikes on it, but that doesn’t mean there could be a painting out there of one, or an exhibit on them at somewhere they grow naturally or a community/botanical garden. And yes, “Streets of Chaos” could be the name of an art piece, even one featuring a spiky cucumber, as even art titles are subjective, not objective.
Again, these are most likely rare cases, ones that don’t get submitted much, so there may be times they get passed ML. Recently, someone asked for removal of 2 Wayspots that they say don’t exist, and the images were most likely AI generated. The photos are for a LFL and a park sign/bench, there’s no Street View in this area, and these objects do have shadows in the photos. Even AI can trick AI these days.
1 Like
With a very limited involvement with ML in previous employment (nothing to do with the coding side), when it first arrived it was already coded with basic instructions. The ML would then “learn” more and could react to more nuanced cases.
I will except that the “spiky cucumber” could have been mistaken as a mural as the image had some effects added.
Some extra info on the “My Home” nomination. “My Home” was entered for all 3 text fields. The same image for both photos. This in itself is grounds to auto reject.
You insinuate that ML is dumb and will only refuse legit nominations, if that was the case then why have it. It is only causing more work if you are having to appeal / re-submit.
In regards to benches, I can only speak of the ones I receive to review and the majority are not suitable waypoints (In memory of Bob that liked it here…). If everyone gets the same %s as me then ML rejecting them all, if yours is eligible appeal seems a sensible thing to do.
I am still receiving many Bench reviews so ML is not automatically refusing them.
Hah, I got the same two in quick succession. I reported them both as fake.
I keep a note of obvious fake or abusive submissions to check back on later. Not many of them get through, but some do… also, where there is a fake submission there are sometimes other fakes so worth having a scout around.
1 Like
With the 1st “My Home” I did consider taking a screen grab to post and originally it was against the submitter but thought that it could be someone that just doesn’t understand the system and even though they had done so themselves I didn’t want to be seen as doxing them.
After the next 1 it was more against the AI.
Didn’t take note of the locations, not sure if they where local to each over.
Good idea to keep a note of them to check at a later date, will remember that if I get any more.
Thanks
1 Like
I don’t see where at that link it says that a bench along a trail is ineligible, could you point that out?
It does not say that Benches along a trail is not eligable but it has to have more then being a standard bench at a randon point.
Artistic benches are acceptable, Ones at scenic viewpoints can be used as an anchor for said viewpoint.
Speaking in regards to the reviews I get most benches are the generic bench maybe with a “In Memory Of…” plaque which are specifically mentioned as ineligable.
Not everything that is ineligible can be listed separately. Standard benches are just not interesting - for exploration, community or exercise. Some benches are eligible if they are interesting or noteworthy.
1 Like
I believe this statement is an incorrect or at least misleading summary of the clarification.
Memorial benches are outlined as ineligible unless noteworthy, but standard benches on a trail that promote scenery or exploration of nature can be (but are not strictly) eligible.
5 Likes
That was my understanding as well, although the community vote can be spotty since benches have such a toxic aura in Wayfarer.
Newtownabbey and Ferryhill - nowhere near each other, but both similarly trying to abuse Wayfarer.
You left off the part where I explained there has to be something else that makes the benches unique, which is basically what the clarification is. Please don’t take others’ words out of context.
I don’t wish to put words in anybody else’s mouth, but I think it tends to be a good idea to include ownership of your idea: “It seems to me…”, or attribute the entire statement to the Wayfarer criteria or Criteria Collection pages.
These strategies can help to keep our communication clear.
I explained after the statement being taken out of context. End of story.
I’m muting this thread, as I’m getting upset.
1 Like
The words I left out that I believe you are referring to were
… Which I don’t think conveyed what you’re implying. Benches get hotly debated and, reading literally this post, reads as though you’re saying “criteria says benches on trials are ineligible but can for scenic views” when it is intentionally more open for benches not just on grandiose locations. Being on a trail is not the disqualifier.
It’s also largely off topic for this thread to continue, but I’d be happy to discuss more if you wanted a different thread to do so. I’m always happy to approve benches on trails when I feel they fall in line with criteria, but that’s perhaps better for a different time and I don’t want to make you upset here.
My reading of the criteria is…
- Standard bench (whether on trail or not) should be ineligible.
- Exceptions where the bench is used as an anchor for a scenic waypoint (I do not see that just because its on a trail should give it a pass).
- Artistic benches are eligible as Art.
- Memorial benches are only eligible if dedicated to a notable figure.
I would definately reject a bench on a trail unless it was seen as artistic or the submitter has shown that it is a scenic waypoint.
As long as you’re willing to accept that not every “scenic viewpoint” must be something spectacular 
Where should you draw the line?
Both examples shown in the “Clarification” are pretty spectacular…
A local to me example, there is a trail that runs along a River for about a mile, at a guess there are about 6 standard benches all looking at the River. Should we accept them all? I would not.
Slightly further up the River widens at a weir, with the right image and description / evidence I would consider this eligible.