[HN Gopher] 'AI-powered' is tech's meaningless equivalent of 'al...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       'AI-powered' is tech's meaningless equivalent of 'all natural'
       (2017)
        
       Author : nvr219
       Score  : 19 points
       Date   : 2023-03-21 19:05 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
        
       | joseph8th wrote:
       | It's a marketing term rendered meaningless by the marketers. Even
       | those who know better keep calling LLMs "AI"
        
       | ralusek wrote:
       | We run all of our bits through "Hot Dog/Not Hot Dog" AI. It
       | turned out to be an identity function, because it thinks the 1s
       | are hot dogs and the 0s aren't. All of our integration tests are
       | still passing...things are just a lot slower around here, and
       | multiple people swear that the servers now smell like a baseball
       | game.
        
       | dexwiz wrote:
       | This article makes sense in 2017, which most AI was just a
       | statistical model. But 6 years later we are living in a much
       | different world.
        
         | pornel wrote:
         | We may seamlessly transition from "this isn't a real A.I, only
         | a bit of simple fuzzy logic" to "this is needlessly using a
         | billion-weights model to simulate a bit of simple fuzzy logic".
        
         | nvr219 wrote:
         | It's still that just with faster computers.
        
         | version_five wrote:
         | It's been funny watching the "it's just a statistical model"
         | crowd who were always quick to chime in (when that's not what
         | 2016 deep learning was) now doing a 180 degree turn to "how do
         | we know the brain isn't just a llm" or whatever silly confused
         | by a mirror opinion they have now, when despite obvious
         | advances in scale, theres no fundamental difference in the
         | models. The only takeaway for me is that people love to
         | passionately misunderstand anything that gets called AI.
        
           | cmarschner wrote:
           | For my part (phd in computational linguistics, first
           | classical ,,AI", then machine learning, then deep learning
           | since 2014, not working on NLP for the past 5 years) - I
           | _thought_ I would know a thing or two about what's possible,
           | and I am still in absolute awe what these models spit out.
           | 
           | People might not be aware that just a few years ago
           | formulating a grammatically correct sentence was a hard
           | problem, let alone all the other things that once had names
           | (anaphora resolution, semantics, pragmatics etc. etc.) and
           | conference tracks and workshops dedicated to them. All that
           | swept away by data and scalable transformer models. It is
           | such a f*cking miracle.
           | 
           | I would be curious what the state of understanding these
           | models is. Haven't done any literature review on this but
           | just reverse engineering whatever structure the model has
           | come about could be enlightning (perhaps).
        
         | nwah1 wrote:
         | Not that much different. 9/10 uses of the term are still
         | complete bullshit. The other 1/10 are still mostly bullshit as
         | well.
        
           | BoorishBears wrote:
           | If you don't understand the potential of a technology it's
           | certainly easier to dismiss it as bullshit than to learn.
           | 
           | Crypto/"Web3" was stupid because of the oracle problem: Your
           | magical NFT can't actually enforce its license without
           | leveraging the slightly centralized concept of the federal
           | court system.
           | 
           | AI as in LLMs and Latent Diffusion do not have that kind of
           | obvious limitation to generating any actual value. There will
           | clearly be _specific_ limitations, but even within the
           | confines of what has been _built_ so far there is an insane
           | amount of value and potential.
           | 
           | Crypto detractors who are lumping AI into the "bullshit"
           | bucket really come across as a broken clock that was right
           | once, and I say that as someone who has been a crypto
           | detractor for a long time.
        
             | nwah1 wrote:
             | I didn't say machine learning is useless.
             | 
             | I said most products claiming to have AI secret sauce have
             | no secret sauce.
             | 
             | Big difference.
        
             | marginalia_nu wrote:
             | Eh, I think a lot of the reasons to be skeptical of crypto
             | still apply to "AI".
             | 
             | AI may have actual real world uses (unlike crypto), but
             | it's also the subject of a huge hype campaign (like crypto)
             | largely consisting of the same people hyping crypto, with
             | similar strategies of emphasizing FOMO (like crypto) and
             | making wild and fantastical claims about unheard of growth
             | and about the end of the existing world order through
             | technology in a way that borders on eachatology (like
             | crypto).
        
       | 360macky wrote:
       | Interesting. I see it. This will be the counterpart of "Human-
       | designed" or "Made by humans".
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-03-21 23:02 UTC)