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

211–220 of 263 posts

Re: Building Jarvis

#211

Post by ocdtrekkie »

floatrock wrote: post #185
tomcam wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 consisten…

I think it's worth pointing out that he started his mobile efforts by talking about how easy it was to make a Facebook Messenger bot, something they're heavily pushing... and then said shortly thereafter, to do what he wanted, he had to switch to making his own app, because Messenger couldn't do what he wanted.

If a Google exec wrote this post, it would be about how amazing a Google product was as a solution to the problem, and that would be the end of it. But here's Mark saying "you know what, Messenger is great but I needed more". And maybe that could turn into some pretty big advice for his Messenger team on what to add next, but he seemed to be pointing out where the industry (including his own company) could do better.

Re: Building Jarvis

#212

Post by shaan7 »

"For assistants like Jarvis to be able to control everything in homes for more people, we need more devices to be connected and the industry needs to develop common APIs and standards for the devices to talk to each other."

This.

Re: Building Jarvis

#213

Post by nojvek »

I did this for my home at a much smaller scale. Using a rasberry pi connected with a IR emitter I can control light switches in my house. Got the cheap $20 for 5 IR sockets.

With computers getting smaller and faster exponentially, a lot of science fiction is quite close.

The hard part is how we can handle this new power. Facebook face recognition can identify me anywhere. Cars can see people/kids in 3d space. Everything I say can be recorded to speech and be searched .

It doesn't take long for AI to realize humans cause a lot of pain to lesser species and eat them as food. They also pollute the planet like crazy and a way to save the planet might be to exterminate some of them.

Re: Building Jarvis

#216

Post by letterthief »

Personally, I find the idea of artificial intelligence both silly in some respects, and anti-human in others. There is no benefit to humans in replacing them. Any benefits are more about specific humans and taking over the world, as in human's advantage relative to other humans. It is the same as nuclear weapons. It doesn't help humanity in any way, it just gives certain humans power over other humans. Also, most of the time, artificial intelligence is no match for human intelligence. One of his goals was to get the AI to "learn his tastes", but to me, this just means he will be given poorly selected music, as what you want to listen to is much more complex then "learning your tastes".

Re: Building Jarvis

#217

Post by Whitestrake »

bmh100 wrote: post #142
kyrias wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would just follow a singular simple algorithm, not really intelligence in any sense.

In the general programming industry over the last several decades, "artificial intelligence" has also applied to simple decision-making algorithms, even as simple as playing checkers. Arthur Samuel [1] was renowned for his work on a checkers AI circa 1959. [1]: http://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~sutton/book/11/node3.html

This is something I like about AI in the context of video games; the technology has improved, the complexity has increased, but the meaning of AI in this context has stayed constant.

The same can't really be said of AI in most other contexts, where the goalposts continually seem to move to whatever is currently just beyond our reach.

Re: Building Jarvis

#218

Post by causalmachine »

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…

@hacker_9

('A')

Albeit, the human brain calculates roughly 10^16 to 10^18 synaptic operations per second. (Exascale Computation)

THIS DAY, artificial neural models calculate 10^14+ synaptic operations per second.

BY EXTENSION, artificial cognitive models have reduced larger number of cognitive tasks, as time diverged, in tandem with enhanced parallelism.

THUSLY, exascale artificial neural models are but likely by 2020. (Moore's Law)

It requires not Einsteinian intellect, such that one observes the prior sequence.

SOLELY IDIOTS/THEISTS FAIL TO COMPUTE THE AFORESAID.

.

.

.

.

.

.

('B')

By extension, artificial intelligence is enhancing exponentially, particularly on the order of Moore's Law.

Here are a sequence COGNITIVE fields/tasks, where sophisticated ARTIFICIAL NEURAL models EXCEED mankind:

1) Language translation (eg: Skype 50+ languages)

2) Legal-conflict-resolution (eg: 'Watson')

3) Self-driving (eg: 'OTTO-Self Driving' )

5) Disease diagnosis (eg: 'Watson')

6) Medicinal drug prescription (eg: 'Watson')

7) Visual Product Sorting (eg: 'Amazon Corrigon' )

8) Help Desk Assistance ('eg: Digital Genius)

9) Mechanical Cucumber Sorting (eg: 'Makoto's Cucumber Sorter')

10) Financial Analysis (eg: 'SigFig')

11) E-Discovery Law (eg: ' Social Science Research Network.')

12) Anesthesiology (eg: 'SedaSys')

13) Music composition (eg: 'Emily')

14) Go (eg: 'Alpha Go')

...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_-wn8ghcoY

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

Re: Building Jarvis

#219

Post by roystonvassey »

I was frankly surprised at how hands on Zuckerberg is. Brilliant.

Also, the most important takeaway, and one that I experience on a day-to-day basis, was the idea that most ML systems currently are heavily over-fitted and scale is going to be a huge challenge.

Re: Building Jarvis

#220

Post by taneq »

rthille wrote: post #195
taneq wrote: post #154

Why is no-one talking about the fact that this is completely, 100% NOT cloud based?

It uses FB Messenger for the non-voice API. How is that NOT cloud-based?

That's an interface to it, but all of the voice processing, image processing, logging etc. happens locally and personally sensitive data (like sound recordings etc.) never leaves the house. At least that's how I read it.

Compare with things like Amazon Echo (and I believe Siri and similar services) which send audio clips to a cloud service and do all of the processing there.

Post reply on HN