Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#131

Post by JamesBarney » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:11 AM UTC

xenobioticants wrote: post #84

j1vms wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether right or wrong, I think it's good to keep in mind that Apple has, by far the highest quarterly profit and total asset value, compared to any of these companies - it really is a giant among giants. Alphabet certainly has an excellent future outlook (reflected in the markets), but its current financial state still pales in comparison to Apple. Taking this into account, I figure Apple thinks twice and thrice bef…

'it really is a giant among giants.' You're confused. That would be Alphabet, not Apple. To put it in perspective for you, Google has: ~90% of the search market ( https://www.statista.com/statistics/216573/worldwide-market-... ) ~90% of the smartphone market ( https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/18/gartner-androids-smartphon... ) ~50% of the online advertisement market ( http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Google-Still-Domin…

I think of this as Google is great at creating value, and Apple is great at capturing value.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#132

Post by pron » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:14 AM UTC

ilaksh wrote: post #114

pron wrote: post #19

Calling simple statistical clustering algorithms that are tweaked by lots of trial-and-error heuristics "AI" feels like calling those slow two-wheeled electric self-balancing skateboards "hoverboards". Sometimes marketing can be too dramatic.

Deep learning is not a simple statistical clustering algorithm. Trial and error is a main way that people learn and it works.

> Deep learning is not a simple statistical clustering algorithm.

What is it, then?

In the 60s people used backpropagation to train neural networks. NN + BP is a very simple statistical clustering algorithm. I know that when I worked on neural networks in the 90s we still used backpropagation. Are they using something different now?

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#133

Post by orionblastar » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:17 AM UTC

xenobioticants wrote: post #84

j1vms wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether right or wrong, I think it's good to keep in mind that Apple has, by far the highest quarterly profit and total asset value, compared to any of these companies - it really is a giant among giants. Alphabet certainly has an excellent future outlook (reflected in the markets), but its current financial state still pales in comparison to Apple. Taking this into account, I figure Apple thinks twice and thrice bef…

'it really is a giant among giants.' You're confused. That would be Alphabet, not Apple. To put it in perspective for you, Google has: ~90% of the search market ( https://www.statista.com/statistics/216573/worldwide-market-... ) ~90% of the smartphone market ( https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/18/gartner-androids-smartphon... ) ~50% of the online advertisement market ( http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Google-Still-Domin…

If they shut down services, they slit their own throat and cut off their revenues as well.

Apple and Google are not the only players in this game, but Microsoft as well as others.

Rather than shut stuff off, Google or Apple if forced to pay taxes will just lawyer up and appeal it in some way.

Yeah developing on OSX/MacOS is better than GNU/Linux, but if you find a good IDE with the programming language you use on GNU/Linux it gets better. Plus GNU/Linux runs on the PC Clones out there as well as ported cross platform for ARM, PowerPC, SPARC, Etc.

A reason why I use GNU/Linux is that it is free and respects my rights as a consumer with no DRM, and if I don't like one version of GNU/Linux there are hundreds of others out there. GNU/Linux is not locked to just one brand of computers as MacOS/OSX is, nor does it have DRM and Telemetry in it like Windows 10.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#134

Post by acronymftw » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:18 AM UTC

Hope they do not use that as an acronym.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#135

Post by orionblastar » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:23 AM UTC

tomnipotent wrote: post #65

gavman wrote: post #49

>>"As of today’s launch, companies like Apple, Twitter, Intel and Baidu are missing from the group. Though Apple is said to be enthusiastic about the project, their absence is still notable because the company has fallen behind in artificial intelligence when compared to its rivals — many of which are part of this new group." It seems Apple's lack of engagement in the community [1] is really starting to hurt it. Did…

Why are you surprised that Apple isn't involved in a field that has no material impact on their business? Outside of Siri and related projects, I don't see where AI/machine learning has any immediate benefits. Twitter and Intel missing seems like something to take note of, but I didn't even think twice about Apple. I'm more surprised GE is missing than Apple.

The big area for AI is to replace a human being with an AI program and not have the customer notice it.

Then those webchat and help desk jobs will be gone and replaced with AI doing robocalls and acting like a chatbot.

I'm getting Robocalls that ask for a Chris or something and as soon as I say there is nobody here by that name (so they can take me off their list) the bot cuts in saying "Maybe you can help?" and then tries to sell me something. Most of the time the Caller ID is spoofed and it calls back with a different Caller ID and number, etc. I'm on the Dot not call list, but Robocallers just war dial numbers until it reaches someone and then tries to hook them in.

Not only that but AI can take the jobs of writers, programmers, managers, legal assistants, and in robot form burger flippers and checkout kiosks.

As we reach 2020-2030 the AI is trying to get as smart as a human being. As long as it has electricity it can work 24/7 without getting tired or hungry like a human being would.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#136

Post by petre » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:29 AM UTC

xenobioticants wrote: post #92

hellameta wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised at this "Apple not AI" narrative. I've had Google Maps & Waze on my iPhone for years and neither of them seamlessly turned on "where did I park my car" feature. I just turned my iPhone on one morning and it just told me. Now, mind you, this may not be a fancy deep learning model. It could be some simple linear model, maybe a tree model, hell, maybe it's hardcoded rules? But despite these things Apple de…

It uses a combination of Bluetooth (if you're near/connected to your car's stereo), motion sensor and GPS. If you started moving at 70KM/h nowhere near a train or bus station, and then suddenly stopped moving at that speed and shortly after started moving at 5KM/h, you've clearly just got out of your car. Use bluetooth for extra verification if possible. When certain, get location (or load location) from GPS and mark…

Acutally not neccessarily. You can as well end up in a traffic jam. In fact that's how they display traffic info on maps: many phone users doing what you just described.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#137

Post by rojobuffalo » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:34 AM UTC

hueving wrote: post #130

rojobuffalo wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure you can. When people working on the Manhattan project calculated how far away they could stand from an atomic bomb detonation--that was an appreciable precaution. There are AGI risks that are well-reasoned and have detailed descriptions. If you aren't engaging with those arguments, proving them invalid or providing a well-reasoned protection, you aren't representing a coherent point of view.

>If you aren't engaging with those arguments, proving them invalid or providing a well-reasoned protection, you aren't representing a coherent point of view. Since when does refusing to engage with fear mongering make you incoherent?

I already described the difference between fear mongering and pushing for caution, so don't conflate those terms. It's incoherent to not engage the arguments--take the control problem into consideration. Are you familiar with the reasoning for the expectancy that an AGI will be built that is smarter than humans at any reasoning task? Are you willing to go along with that? If so, then what follows is that the AGI improves the design of its own software and hardware better than any human engineer. At this point, there is a recursive improvement process termed an "intelligence explosion". From that point forward, we have no idea how to ensure that the goals of the AGI remain in alignment with human values. And the AGI can out-maneuver any attempt to turn it off. It's not guaranteed that it will want to avoid being turned off; but you could easily see how avoiding being turned off would improve the probability that it achieves its optimization parameters.

Where do you check out?

Edit: Nick Bostrom is the thought leader on this subject and he spells it out in this talk: https://goo.gl/DzNnk2. His book, Superintelligence, is really good.

Edit 2: And here is the audio for a Sam Harris talk also on this subject: https://goo.gl/6wdG43

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#138

Post by thr0waway1239 » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:36 AM UTC

I was starting to get worried about the data collection already happening individually at these big companies. Now that they have announced a partnership which potentially combines all this data together, I feel so much better!

The funny thing is, the companies are ALWAYS going to put a positive spin on this. Not very different from the WhatsApp "we won't show ads, ever" messaging. Now I am in the camp which says "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me". Almost none of these companies can be trusted at this point. [1] Their refusal to ask OpenAI to be at the table really does not reflect well on them [2]. And the less said about the tenured professors who are now becoming company mouthpieces saying things like "we create products which cannot make profit but which is meant purely for data collection" the better [3]. And lastly, if these companies had such a sincere desire to "improve AI for the sake of humanity", how about they start by letting OpenAI (or a similar company) do a data audit of all the information they share so that we can actually be certain it is not just a data brokerage masquerading as a public service?

I wanted to say that I wish the AI community will boycott this effort completely. I find it a bit worrying that this community now resides almost entirely within the walls of corporate America.

[1] Interestingly, the only company which is even making noises about user privacy is Apple. Is it possible they saw something in this partnership that they didn't like?

[2] https://twitter.com/OpenAI/status/781243032582578177

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12428883

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#139

Post by randcraw » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:37 AM UTC

hartator wrote: post #111

treehau5 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not fear mongering. Some of the ideas I hear from people on this forum, from academia, and the likes are just downright terrifying, and we don't even know what future AI will be capable of. We have to decide as a society, and decide really soon how far we are willing to take AI research. We built the nuclear bomb, but we decided when to stop. We didn't build more advanced bombs that could level entire providence…

Aren't fusion bombs 1000x more powerful than the original Little Boy (Name of the hiroshima bomb)?

Yes, and that's why atomic weaponry is unusable and largely irrelevant. In contrast, AI is eminently usable in business and government, and in such a wide range of means and purposes that it is much more likely to change our lives, in ways that are largely still unimaginable. As more AI is adopted and shapes policy and practice throughout the world, business, gov't, and Joe Public will gradually relinquish ever more personal information to it, inviting excess oversight, micromanagement, and abuse by those who control the AI.

After all, the corporations joined in this partnership are the very behemoths that gather and control almost all the world's social and personal information, which is their primary product and essential to their revenue stream and their very survival. If the public (and gov't policy makers) ever conclude that these firms and their AI are a rising threat, then like various European countries, the US too might enact 'onerous' regulation which could diminish their access to our data, AKA their life's blood.

I think THAT'S what this AI partnership is really about. It's the start of a political action initiative, apparently led by unthreatening figures like CS academics rather than capitalists. It's intended to diffuse the visibility of these companies' advancing political interests and lobbying in Washington so their growing injection of AI into our lives won't suddenly show up on our radar one day soon as an inbound threat from the clear blue sky above. Once they gain a sufficient foothold in Washington and assure that we remain inured to the idea of AI, they can turn up the heat until we froggies boil, blissfully oblivious to the rising clouds of steam.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#140

Post by neosat » Thu, Sep 29, 2016, 4:46 AM UTC

altcognito wrote: post #68

j1vms wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether right or wrong, I think it's good to keep in mind that Apple has, by far the highest quarterly profit and total asset value, compared to any of these companies - it really is a giant among giants. Alphabet certainly has an excellent future outlook (reflected in the markets), but its current financial state still pales in comparison to Apple. Taking this into account, I figure Apple thinks twice and thrice bef…

I also don't think of them as a straight technology company, but more of a best of breed product company focused on a great user experience. In that sense, high risk, long term investments that don't have an immediate application don't fit their profile.

Technology is broader than just software (though I'm not implying you said it is just software). Apple is a phenomenal technology company - their hardware + software integration is unmatched and they have made advances in everything from software to hardware to supply chain optimization to manufacturing technology.

Also, they are ( or at least were) a prime example of a company that can bet on high risk, longish term investments that don't have an immediate application : e.g. their investment in chips, touch technology etc. It may not be as long term as some of the Google X stuff but I don't think it is fair to call them averse to making high risk long term investments.