> "Snapchat’s algorithm didn’t get the humor."

Presumably, the actual text of the message was reviewed by a human? So the human(s) didn't get the humor either?

EDIT: by "humans" I mean the FBI / cops.

skeledrew 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Why would a human review it? That only drives up costs for the company. Easier to use algorithms for everything and maybe pay the occasional fine when something goes seriously wrong and legal proceedings result.

▲

johnnyanmac a day ago | parent | next [-]

If a human did read it, it very likely was not someone who was a native English speaker making well below minimum wage of the area they are trying to contextualize.

▲

djoldman 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I mean the FBI / cops.

	▲	skeledrew 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Possible they also asked AI to do a "risk assessment" and just went with it.

▲

LocalH 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

That's a really generous presumption. The direction this industry is moving towards is to use AI to avoid human involvement.

At best, their algorithm flagged it, and a human rubber-stamped it.

	▲	maxerickson 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I mean, the FBI guys that drove to the school probably read it.