Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Building Jarvis

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 263 posts

Re: Building Jarvis

#181

Post by jayajay »

This is one of the most insightful, down to earth articles I have read about AI.

I hope Google/Amazon and all of the people in ML can take some time to read it.

Main Important Points:

0. Build a simple, easy prototype first. Then add better functionality later when you have finished the simple things.

1. Users will be using text over speech more than we think.

2. Users always have their phones with them. This suggests that assistant control should be done via the phone, rather than through fixed hubs around the house.

3. General AI is more akin to a limit point, rather than some attainable state.

4. Users need to be able to interface with training processes of their assistant to create more personalized interactions. A new user-machine command protocol may be invented soon to create an interface for this.

5. New data protocols may be necessary to to jump start AI and IOT together.

6. Aggressive AI will be needed to make AI more hands-off in the future; more autonomous.

7. More advanced mathematics and internal representation will be needed to allow AI systems to obtain and apply domain knowledge in isomorphic tasks.

Re: Building Jarvis

#183

Post by hacker_9 »

haser_au wrote: post #179
hacker_9 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet 30 years we could do all that with a whole lot of if statements. It would just return false positives a lot more. A couple of others have replied saying the same thing as you that this is 'AI', but it's not. As soon as you try to use it for something it wasn't programmed for, it fails. It doesn't even understand what it is doing right now. This isn't me 'moving the goalposts' either, we have literally never a…

Have a read of this; http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolu... It's a very long read, but it will give you a much better overview of AI and the different "calibres" than I could possibly try to in a HN comment. What Mark has used here is "Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI)", the first of three levels/calibres of AI. Level 2 is "Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)", otherwise known as "Human…

sigh this is why I don't usually get involved in arguments about whether something is considered AI or not; it just devolves into people trying to define and redefine what the word 'AI' even means.

Final word: I follow this stuff closely and read the research articles, and what we currently have is really great, but it's still just pulling the wool over your eyes. These techniques and algorithms trick you into thinking they are intelligent when in fact they are anything but. What we have now is a parlour trick in comparison to what the brain is doing. When true AI actually comes along, no one will doubt it.

Re: Building Jarvis

#184

Post by tim333 »

hacker_9 wrote: post #175
haser_au wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Calling it AI is a bit of a stretch though Mark replied to a comment along these exact lines. Quote below; Mark Zuckerberg: That's the thing about AI. It's sort of like magic. We only call things AI that we don't understand yet. Once we understand something, it's just math. But if you'd asked someone 30 years if a computer system that you could talk to, that could see your friends and let them in, that could learn…

And yet 30 years we could do all that with a whole lot of if statements. It would just return false positives a lot more. A couple of others have replied saying the same thing as you that this is 'AI', but it's not. As soon as you try to use it for something it wasn't programmed for, it fails. It doesn't even understand what it is doing right now. This isn't me 'moving the goalposts' either, we have literally never a…

You couldn't do face or voice recognition 30 years ago with if statements.

Re: Building Jarvis

#185

Post by floatrock »

tomcam wrote: post #137
skummetmaelk wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It goes under CEO time as marketing.

Facile, needlessly cynical, and with zero evidence. I don't like FB or Zuckerberg, but what I read was a good write up of a fun project done well.

Oh come on, it was clearly both. Try to tell us this excerpt is not an advertisement for the facebook SDK:

> I'd learn a lot about the state of AI this year, but I didn't realize I would also learn so much about what it's like to be an engineer at Facebook. And it's impressive.

> My experience of ramping up in the Facebook codebase is probably pretty similar to what most new engineers here go through. I was consistently impressed by how well organized our code is, and how easy it was to find what you're looking for -- whether it's related to face recognition, speech recognition, the Messenger Bot Framework [messenger.com/platform] or iOS development...

The rest of that paragraph goes through all the other developer tools you can sign up for in the facebook ecosystem, including convenient links. Then it continues:

> One of our values is "move fast". That means you should be able to come here and build an app faster than you can anywhere else, including on your own. You should be able to come here and use our infra and AI tools to build things it would take you a long time to build on your own.

It was a neat project, not denying that, but there is no free lunch. The CEO of a Fortune 500 does not write up a 5-10 min read without plugging his interests.

You can enjoy what he's doing, but also recognize what it is.

Re: Building Jarvis

#186

Post by cutler »

tomschlick wrote: post #73
jameshart wrote: post #4

zuck-mbpl:~ zuck$ php j play some red hot chili peppers PHP as a shell scripting language. Old habits die hard, huh?

With projects like composer/symfony/laravel & the plethora of really good PHP packages out there, it is easy to write a good CLI with PHP these days.

Simple text parsing in PHP7 is also faster than in Python, Ruby, Perl and NodeJS. I recently wrote some 1-liners to parse a 19Mb log file with a regex on my 2010 quad-core Mac. Python/Ruby: 2.2 secs. Perl: 1.4 secs. NodeJS: 0.9 secs. PHP7: 0.4 secs.

Re: Building Jarvis

#187

Post by dolguldur »

mgiannopoulos wrote: post #97
sandworm101 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In his world "finding the time" to do the running counts as part of the effort. I swim farther than that each year an see no acomplishment in such a distance.

Still, Mark Zuckerberg writes about a total of 100 hours on this project, is that plausible?

I find it implausible.

Re: Building Jarvis

#188

Post by ecopoesis »

hacker_9 wrote: post #183
haser_au wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have a read of this; http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolu... It's a very long read, but it will give you a much better overview of AI and the different "calibres" than I could possibly try to in a HN comment. What Mark has used here is "Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI)", the first of three levels/calibres of AI. Level 2 is "Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)", otherwise known as "Human…

sigh this is why I don't usually get involved in arguments about whether something is considered AI or not; it just devolves into people trying to define and redefine what the word 'AI' even means. Final word: I follow this stuff closely and read the research articles, and what we currently have is really great, but it's still just pulling the wool over your eyes. These techniques and algorithms trick you into thinki…

I was unaware that we knew how how human intelligence works.

If we can build systems that can fool us into thinking their intelligent (which I will agree that outside of limited scopes we have not), then we built intelligence.

Re: Building Jarvis

#189

Post by [deleted] »

hacker_9 wrote: post #183
haser_au wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have a read of this; http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolu... It's a very long read, but it will give you a much better overview of AI and the different "calibres" than I could possibly try to in a HN comment. What Mark has used here is "Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI)", the first of three levels/calibres of AI. Level 2 is "Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)", otherwise known as "Human…

sigh this is why I don't usually get involved in arguments about whether something is considered AI or not; it just devolves into people trying to define and redefine what the word 'AI' even means. Final word: I follow this stuff closely and read the research articles, and what we currently have is really great, but it's still just pulling the wool over your eyes. These techniques and algorithms trick you into thinki…

[deleted]

Re: Building Jarvis

#190

Post by tomphoolery »

haser_au wrote: post #173
hacker_9 wrote: post #21

Say what you will about Zuckerberg, but this is a really cool project! Steps he took: 1. Connect his home devices (lights, thermostat, doors, music player, TV, CCTV etc) to his computer, so he can turn them on and off from it and in general automate his house from his PC. 2. Add an NLP component to his computer, so he could text instructions to it and it would apply the correct automation task. This can learn prefere…

>> Calling it AI is a bit of a stretch though Mark replied to a comment along these exact lines. Quote below; Mark Zuckerberg: That's the thing about AI. It's sort of like magic. We only call things AI that we don't understand yet. Once we understand something, it's just math. But if you'd asked someone 30 years if a computer system that you could talk to, that could see your friends and let them in, that could learn…

In my parents generation, and the generation that came after them (the one my siblings belong to, Gen X), I still think this differentiation between concepts of fictional AI were present. Consider for example the computer systems in Star Trek, and especially The Next Generation, and contrast how they worked with how Commander Data was depicted. The computer systems on Star Trek can be programmed using natural language, and by the 23rd century they're capable of even piloting an entire starship that a crew of hundreds would normally be required for. Yet, these computer systems never engage in the kind of inner exploration (or "character development") that Commander Data goes through every episode. This is what we're seeing here, Jarvis is more like a primitive version of the USS Enterprise's central computer, whereas "true" artificial intelligence, the kind that makes complex decisions on its own and has the capability of self awareness, still remains fiction.

Writers, at least, understood that there were different "flavors" of artificial intelligence. I have a funny feeling that at least science fiction enthusiasts also knew that AI would be separated in this way if it ever came to fruition.

Post reply on HN