Live data from Hacker News

This AI Boom Will Also Bust

overcomingbias.com

11–20 of 320 posts

Re: This AI Boom Will Also Bust

#11
When I was at Watson this is the first thing I told every customer: before you start with AI are you already doing the more mundane data science on your structured data? If not, you shouldn't go right away for the shiny object.

This said I still believe the article is mistaken in its evaluation of potential impact (and its fuzzy metaphore of pipes). Unstructured or semi-structured or dirty data is much more prevalent than cleaned structured data on which you can do simple regression to get insight.

Ultimately the class of problems solved by more advanced AI will be incommensurably bigger than the class of problems solved by simple machine learning. I could make a big laundry list but just start thinking of anything that involves images, sound, or text (ie most form of human communication).

Re: This AI Boom Will Also Bust

#12
We're building an applied AI business by creating an experience through both hardware and software. You don't set out to create something with as big a breadth of vision by worrying about booms and busts. You continue your journey unwavering because the potential impact and fruitfulness of development is worth it.

This is why you should work on something you're passionate about. Your time on earth is limited, so strive to leave good work and contribute to the progress of humanity on a larger scale.

Re: This AI Boom Will Also Bust

#13
post #5

This article matches what I've been seeing anecdotally (especially at smaller tech firms and universities in the Midwest US). I've been hearing more folks in research and industry express the importance of applying simpler techniques (like linear regression and decision trees) before reaching for the latest state-of-the-art approach. See also this response to the author's tweet on the subject: https://twitter.com/and…

Saying that linear regression is easier to do properly than more complex methods like random forests, DL, boosting etc is like saying that people should code assembly instead of python

Re: This AI Boom Will Also Bust

#14

I plan to enter a PhD program in 1-2 years to specialize in ML/Deep Learning. Assuming it'll take 5-6 years to complete my degree how applicable should my skill sets be in industry at that point?

A PhD is, by it's nature, rather self structured. How much value will be added to your skills over that time will depend in no small part to how you spend it.

Re: This AI Boom Will Also Bust

#16
post #2

> Good CS expert says: Most firms that think they want advanced AI/ML really just need linear regression on cleaned-up data. Cleaning up data is very expensive. And without that, the analysis is good for nothing. AI helps provide good analysis without having to cleaning up data manually. I don't see how that is going away.

> AI helps provide good analysis without having to cleaning up data manually.

I don't even know where to start. I suppose you don't really think that what separates ML/AI (whatever that means) from your standard OLS regression is that denoising is not done manually?

> Cleaning up data is very expensive. And without that, the analysis is good for nothing.

I hope you are not saying here that linear regression cannot handle noise.

In the end, as this blog post also points out, ML/AI is just a vague blanket term. What you want is a statistical method that captures the signal as fast and efficiently as possible and often the gain from going beyond simple linear models might be marginal.

Re: This AI Boom Will Also Bust

#18

I plan to enter a PhD program in 1-2 years to specialize in ML/Deep Learning. Assuming it'll take 5-6 years to complete my degree how applicable should my skill sets be in industry at that point?

you'll be a programmer - that is what counts. How good of a programmer you will be will determine your success. never put your eggs in one basket (not saying you shouldn't become an ML expert though, that's pretty damn nice). as a Phd, you are probably good enough.

as to ML, its adoption is hyped. it is powerful, but not as anyone really talks about.

support vector machines and Bayesian learning have been around since the 70s/80s (ninja edit: SVM's since 1963! Markov Chains 1950s, Bayesian Learning/Pattern recognition sine the 1950's), but adoption has been slow due to the nature of business, which is now drooling over it since neural networks beat a few algorithms.

due to the hype, more business will opt for ML now, but the craze will plateau and ML will become another tool in your arsenal.

so basically, you really have nothing to worry about - use your Phd to do interesting things, come up with novel and new research and/or develop your own product.

don't let your job security worries get in the way of enjoying what you want to do now, you're already good and in STEM (and if you don't feel good enough, work on yourself until you do).

Re: This AI Boom Will Also Bust

#19
post #2

> Good CS expert says: Most firms that think they want advanced AI/ML really just need linear regression on cleaned-up data. Cleaning up data is very expensive. And without that, the analysis is good for nothing. AI helps provide good analysis without having to cleaning up data manually. I don't see how that is going away.

I agree that using AI to get something that sort-of works out of dirty data is one of the appeals and is going to get people using it.

If this works at all, the problem is that what you wind-up with is a system that's been heuristically taught to clean-up data for a single snap-shot of your data - and the teaching is expensive and requires experts who are going to move on. Less expensive than clean your data but still a cost.

So when you wind-up with a different pattern of dirty data after a year's time, the system winds crappier than previously and no one will be able to agree how to fix it.

Eventually AI is going to get an evil reputation and that may kill its appeal.

Re: This AI Boom Will Also Bust

#20
post #2

> Good CS expert says: Most firms that think they want advanced AI/ML really just need linear regression on cleaned-up data. Cleaning up data is very expensive. And without that, the analysis is good for nothing. AI helps provide good analysis without having to cleaning up data manually. I don't see how that is going away.

> AI helps provide good analysis without having to cleaning up data manually.

My own experience has shown that dirty data impacts advanced AI just as much as it impacts far more basic ML techniques.

Even for the most advanced AI we work on, we spend just as much time worrying about clean data as we do anything else.

Post reply on HN