Opinions on AI

[Veseleil]

I still don't see how that works. Mr Jensen steps onto stage, says "AI" and money magically appears? Why? How? What's the point of all this?

Things like new cars or phones are at least feeding an illusion that you're benefiting from them somehow (even though you're really not), so the common Joe will want it. But why would the common Joe want AI? Sure, there's no feature, but there's no illusion, either. Just buzzwords and thin air.

Because they're in a hurry to get on the train of replacing human slaves with an AI (and its proprietary hardware). We've (the slaves) built them an empire(s) which now only need maintenance work. And the humans aren't perfect for that job because of many (philosophical) reasons.

 

[AusWolf]

Because they're in a hurry to get on the train of replacing human slaves with an AI (and its proprietary hardware). We've (the slaves) built them an empire(s) which now only need maintenance work. And the humans aren't perfect for that job because of many (philosophical) reasons.

If only we tried to replace actual human slaves (manual labourers), and not creative workers!

 

[Veseleil]

If only we tried to replace actual human slaves (manual labourers), and not creative workers!

We're all slaves in their eyes (They - I'm talking about people that rule the world, not the country leaders, or other minor puppets).
They desire to build an entity(s) that possess all the knowledge accumulated through the lifespan of many generations and genius individuals, but so that it can be turned off by pushing a single button, so it doesn't become a threat (to them) by any means.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

I still don't see how that works. Mr Jensen steps onto stage, says "AI" and money magically appears? Why? How? What's the point of all this?

Things like new cars or phones are at least feeding an illusion that you're benefiting from them somehow (even though you're really not), so the common Joe will want it. But why would the common Joe want AI? Sure, there's no feature, but there's no illusion, either. Just buzzwords and thin air.

Stock, not sales. Though too many consumers see "AI" and go "ooh, shiny" in the same way investors do. Anyways, since most executive salaries are primarily stock options, driving the price of stock up is the primary focus of executives.

And investors bite because "AI" is the next revolution and will change the world. Or so they hear.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

And investors bite because "AI" is the next revolution and will change the world. Or so they hear.

Someone must replace investors hears and... brain maybe too.

 

[dragontamer5788]

I still don't see how that works. Mr Jensen steps onto stage, says "AI" and money magically appears? Why? How? What's the point of all this?

Things like new cars or phones are at least feeding an illusion that you're benefiting from them somehow (even though you're really not), so the common Joe will want it. But why would the common Joe want AI? Sure, there's no feature, but there's no illusion, either. Just buzzwords and thin air.

"Why" isn't the useful question.

"How" is simple. As Jensen says "AI", their stock price goes up, which NVidia (and other companies related to AI) can sell to extract money from the investors who are now buying the stock.

That's all there is to it. The more the stock goes up, the happier the owners are. And they've noticed that so so so many investors are throwing money at this idea.

Just buzzwords and thin air.

Metaverse. Web3. Web2 for that matter, lol. XML. IBM Cell Supercomputer. Watson. Google Reader. Theranos. MoviePass. WeWork.

These companies have been extracting investor wealth since... well... since PT Barnum at least ("The Greatest Showman"). I mean hell, during the great "age of sail", there was a famous company that started up to fund a fake country. Whatever sounds new, exciting and possibly a lucrative investment will get a ton of investor money. Even if it has no chance of working out. That's how you get 20+ years of investors throwing money at Keely Engines or other such falsehoods.

The important tidbit is to sit back and relax. You can't control other people's money no matter how hard you try anyway. Maybe warn your friends / people you care about against wasting money on the worst of ideas but that's roughly the most you can do in these circumstances.

 

[cal5582]

"Why" isn't the useful question.

"How" is simple. As Jensen says "AI", their stock price goes up, which NVidia (and other companies related to AI) can sell to extract money from the investors who are now buying the stock.

That's all there is to it. The more the stock goes up, the happier the owners are. And they've noticed that so so so many investors are throwing money at this idea.



Metaverse. Web3. Web2 for that matter, lol. XML. IBM Cell Supercomputer. Watson. Google Reader. Theranos. MoviePass. WeWork.

These companies have been extracting investor wealth since... well... since PT Barnum at least ("The Greatest Showman"). I mean hell, during the great "age of sail", there was a famous company that started up to fund a fake country. Whatever sounds new, exciting and possibly a lucrative investment will get a ton of investor money. Even if it has no chance of working out. That's how you get 20+ years of investors throwing money at Keely Engines or other such falsehoods.

The important tidbit is to sit back and relax. You can't control other people's money no matter how hard you try anyway. Maybe warn your friends / people you care about against wasting money on the worst of ideas but that's roughly the most you can do in these circumstances.

A lot of people dont understand that stocks arent predicated on product releases, they are predicated on investor speculation.

 

[Rover4444]

It depends on who's using it.

 

[r.h.p]

It may surprise you that even though I'm a techie, my opinion is quite negative and firmly that the world is worse off with the automation of the workforce, and make no mistake, this is AI's ultimate goal - the final endeavor, to automate intellectual work that cannot be easily solved by machines and simple robotics. The further development of this technology will no doubt result in sentience, and that opens a whole gamut of moral and ethical dilemmas on their own.

As wondrous as the information age has been, I sincerely believe that we as a species have gotten dumber as a result. I am ready, I want the information era to end so we can finally begin to look at the space age, pioneering human expansion onto other planets. But instead, what do we get? Kiosks, totems, automated machines even to make a sandwich, all the while leaving another person jobless, homeless, and aimed at a life of crime rather than someone who could be working, contributing their small part towards a brighter future, all so some C-level executive can take another million in pay home at the end of the fiscal year.

frakin eh, u nailed it this time @Dr. Dro . Sorry ive come into this AI LLMs thing a bit late but are catching up real fast. Ive noticed and this could be relevant because my post is so long after the Original OP
when i use google Now it automatically goes to a AI chatbot prick , not info being written and spread through the net? Tell me if i need new Updates to my... code

just saw this article which i thought interesting
Firms and researchers at odds over superhuman AI

 

[DirtyDingusMcgee]

I think we need to take a hard look at the goals of ai. I don't really care if it can make pictures or music, or if it can sound just like Charlie Sheen or Barack Obama. I don't want it to organize my data or do my taxes or drive my car.

i'd like to see some good done with it. Cure cancer or solve quantum gravity.......let's do something useful with this great tool everyone is wetting themselves over.

Till I see something come of it that i see as a clear benefit, I will remain skeptical of its utility.

 

[InVasMani]

People are the problem not technology itself.

 

[Vayra86]

frakin eh, u nailed it this time @Dr. Dro . Sorry ive come into this AI LLMs thing a bit late but are catching up real fast. Ive noticed and this could be relevant because my post is so long after the Original OP
when i use google Now it automatically goes to a AI chatbot prick , not info being written and spread through the net? Tell me if i need new Updates to my... code

just saw this article which i thought interesting
Firms and researchers at odds over superhuman AI

Of course it is marketing spin. We've seen it all before. The earliest events of this were not even human inventions, but just humans looking at phenomena, like thunder. We thought the Gods were mad at us, we'd better do ... whatever the shaman says, or rambles, in an opioid-infused stupor. He claims to know what the future holds, so let's do that. Yeah.

AI is a promise of some utopian new world, enabled by it, because we barely need to do anything anymore. We can just dream up a prompt and get it made.

You don't need a lot of common sense to realize that's bullshit, we're still humans, we still have human needs, and AI is just another tool in our toolbox. Its also an expensive tool, and companies have learned that if they need to get something funded, they need to market it. That's what we're getting: marketing.

This whole circus affair between Sutskever and OpenAI and the fearmongering around and from that company about the monster they are creating... except not wanting to create... (can you get more paradoxical and full of shit than that?) they act like they're creating the next Thermonuclear Bomb, while in fact they're just asking for money. Its all about money. Today we learn OpenAI might actually not need to go commercial. At the same time, we know they can't get their subscription services funded proper, so in reality they just don't have a commercial business case to begin with, and never had. The AI bubble is already bursting. What will remain? Focused applications: TOOLS ; created for very specific purposes that we can tightly align and control the output of. Not much different than what current day algorithms have been doing for the better part of two decades now. All AI is promising to do on top of that, is democratize the processing power for more complex algorithms. Shared refinement of these algorithms, too. Its just Big Data * lots of GPUs * lots of storage, whereas first it was Big Data * lots of storage.

Its similar to crypto and the blockchain. A utopian promise... carried by a core technology that really isn't much more than that. Crypto gave us the blockchain. Everything else is thin air built on bullshit. AI gives us the LLM. History repeats. All that really matters is how well it can generate porn (jk).

People are the problem not technology itself.

Yeah that's what Musk and all the other tech bros keep saying. Do you actually realize what you've just said, here? This is the rationale of sci fi books where the technology is sacred and the human is an annoying factor impeding its progress.

I think its the polar opposite. The technology is the problem. People need to adjust to it and we're slow learners. Look at the internet. We still haven't mastered using it. We're easily addicted to a screen and it hurts us physically and mentally, yet we keep doing it. The vast majority of people can't see through the psychological tricks employed even on a simple website and gets manipulated by it - just simple blocks of text and colors or pictures that, for example, can be infinitely scrolled down on. Isn't technology supposed to improve our lives?

 

[Rover4444]

let's do something useful with this great tool everyone is wetting themselves over.

It is though, it's solving loneliness and doing vibe coding. Massive W!

All that really matters is how well it can generate porn (jk).

This but not jk

 

[r.h.p]

@Rover4444 what type of vibe coding ... just interested ...
so from what i gather Ai is in its infants ... or does someone have a example that can show us were Ai is currently being used as a pro-active tool ( not co-pilot or what eva . chat bot ) Is it possible that the processing power is too great at the present time to actually give a answer back in real time when asked e g:

this is just a example

 

[Shihab]

so from what i gather Ai is in its infants ... or does someone have a example that can show us were Ai is currently being used as a pro-active tool ( not co-pilot or what eva . chat bot ) Is it possible that the processing power is too great at the present time to actually give a answer back in real time when asked e g:

It really depends on the definition of "AI."

If you include all machine learning, then you can find quite a few that are considered mature.

If you limit the definition to the current buzz-use (LLMs and chatbots), then yes and no. It's still in its infancy, yes, but you can find quite a few production uses for it. Half </exaggeration> the sites I visit these days spam me with prompts to use their AI "assistants." And I believe most, large business with customer support are actively replacing the first stages of these pipelines with chatbots (nee robots, in the heads of angry customers having to pass them in order to get to a human who actually can understand what the problem is. Although sometimes they can be amusing, not to the business, of course).

 

[AusWolf]

It really depends on the definition of "AI."

If you include all machine learning, then you can find quite a few that are considered mature.

If you limit the definition to the current buzz-use (LLMs and chatbots), then yes and no. It's still in its infancy, yes, but you can find quite a few production uses for it.

Everybody says AI is in its infancy. The big question is, will it ever emerge out of it? Or will it be remembered as one of the biggest fads of our time? Just like "crypto would take over the world" - yeah, right...

 

[r.h.p]

It really depends on the definition of "AI."

If you include all machine learning, then you can find quite a few that are considered mature.

If you limit the definition to the current buzz-use (LLMs and chatbots), then yes and no. It's still in its infancy, yes, but you can find quite a few production uses for it. Half </exaggeration> the sites I visit these days spam me with prompts to use their AI "assistants." And I believe most, large business with customer support are actively replacing the first stages of these pipelines with chatbots (nee robots, in the heads of angry customers having to pass them in order to get to a human who actually can understand what the problem is. Although sometimes they can be amusing, not to the business, of course).

Everybody says AI is in its infancy. The big question is, will it ever emerge out of it? Or will it be remembered as one of the biggest fads of our time? Just like "crypto would take over the world" - yeah, right...

thats what im trying to determine , to use a Cliche from T3 Brewster knew that invoking Skynet would render them Useless , So will we ever be that Underpowered by Ai that it knows
our weakness ?? do you think that @AusWolf thinks we could be at a cross roads ?

 

[AusWolf]

thats what im trying to determine , to use a Cliche from T3 Brewster knew that invoking Skynet would render them Useless , So will we ever be that Underpowered by Ai that it knows
our weakness ?? do you think that @AusWolf thinks we could be at a cross roads ?

What I think is that AI has been the buzzword of ages (right next to EV and climate change) ever since Nvidia Turing came out in 2018. ChatGPT and Google AI are the only commercially usable fruits I've seen come out of it since then... which has been 7 years already. If AI really is the future, then I would assume progress on it would be a little bit faster, and more diverse than just upping the version number on DLSS.

 

[Vayra86]

It really depends on the definition of "AI."

If you include all machine learning, then you can find quite a few that are considered mature.

If you limit the definition to the current buzz-use (LLMs and chatbots), then yes and no. It's still in its infancy, yes, but you can find quite a few production uses for it. Half </exaggeration> the sites I visit these days spam me with prompts to use their AI "assistants." And I believe most, large business with customer support are actively replacing the first stages of these pipelines with chatbots (nee robots, in the heads of angry customers having to pass them in order to get to a human who actually can understand what the problem is. Although sometimes they can be amusing, not to the business, of course).

The fun thing is, its not really AI at work I believe here. Or there is a small core but the majority is still just what chatbots have always done.

Ask scripted questions, wait for response, check the script again.
Its just a callcenter script in a computer.

Example, I wanted to know about a work order for my car. You give a few details that are asked by the bot, the bot receives them, queries them on a database, and spits out the order. Its just Search with an AI sticker on it. Since I knew beforehand that they always want two personal details for identification I offered the license plate number and my phone number. If I hadn't, it'd have asked me two questions to complete the query. So advanced... And then there's the multitude of times you're trying to do this and it just doesn't quite work, or you get asked all kinds of silly questions because your wording just so happens to not be trained into the model.

 

[Shihab]

The fun thing is, its not really AI at work I believe here. Or there is a small core but the majority is still just what chatbots have always done.

Ask scripted questions, wait for response, check the script again.
Its just a callcenter script in a computer.

AI =/= AGI.

But yes, a customer support chatbot would tend to follow the script, no different than a human rep. The "intelligence" part in both cases isn't crafting new responses, but interpreting the questions and matching them to specific parts of the script. Sure, chatbots are currently somewhat limited on this regard, but so would any human trying to use a language that isn't their native tongues (and sometimes even in their natives ones).

Humans can be -and often are- idiots and inept, I don't see why anyone would expect a machine intelligence to be always smart and capable. Snake oil salesmen notwithstanding.

Concerning the first paragraph: Innovation (and I'm not using the term with the implicit meaning of "good" here) is always cumulative.

Everybody says AI is in its infancy. The big question is, will it ever emerge out of it? Or will it be remembered as one of the biggest fads of our time? Just like "crypto would take over the world" - yeah, right...

Crypto is a libertarian bs that didn't mean to solve a technical problem, it only aimed to push an ideological belief. AI has always been a purely utilitarian goal. It got appropriated by capital because, well, that's what capital does, for better or worse. But the benefits of the field, within the scientific and the [technical] professional fields as a whole aren't really questioned. Like I said, we've been using its subdeciplines (ML) for a while now, even before this chatbot craze.

The question isn't whether "AI is going to take over the world," the question is when are we going to the stead-state part of this idiotic hype cycle.

 

[AusWolf]

Humans can be -and often are- idiots and inept, I don't see why anyone would expect a machine intelligence to be always smart and capable.

Because
1. That's how it's being sold/marketed, and
2. If AI isn't more intelligent than your average human, then firing that human to get the job done with AI doesn't improve our quality of life - quite the contrary. You get worse service while unemployment rises.

 

[Shihab]

Because
1. That's how it's being sold/marketed, and
2. If AI isn't more intelligent than your average human, then firing that human to get the job done with AI doesn't improve our quality of life - quite the contrary. You get worse service while unemployment rises.

Which is why I added the exception at the end of that paragraph.
Corporations are going to do everything to selling you their wares, and idiot CEOs and CTOs and whatnot (on the consuming end) are going to buy into whatever buzz they can paint all over in their marketing jargon and investor reports.

How the tool is used does not necessarily speak for what the tool can do and what it's best at.