Live data from Hacker News

The AI Misinformation Epidemic

approximatelycorrect.com

71–80 of 286 posts

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#71

Here is my annoyance with AI Hype: people seeking extra tailwinds pitch their startups as "ML companies" even with the most tangential usage of ML. It drowns out real ML companies. Most people cannot tell the difference. At a hackathon recently, someone pitched their app as an "ML-driven app" though the only ML in there was some 1-line language translation feature they were consuming off Watson REST services for a ta…

I'd say you can build real "ML-driven apps"using only APIs - I disagree that you have to build it all from scratch

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#73
post #44
post #14

From all I can see, nearly all the present AI boils down to one word -- hype. From what is really going on, nearly all of it looks like (1) in some cases a lot of new data, (2) some new, faster processor hardware, e.g., based on graphical processor units although the x86 processors are astoundingly fast anyway, able to manipulate the new data, (3) for what manipulations to do on the data, some tweaks of some of the w…

You'd do it to make money. Boatloads of delicious, steaming venture capital. Mmm.

I can say with high confidence that there is not even one venture capital person in the US who would invest even 10 cents in my work, call it AI or not, before they see usage significant and growing rapidly, and then they are not investing in the math or the AI but just the traction and its rate of growth.

Besides, I'm a solo founder with a meager burn rate so that by the time I have the traction the VCs want, I will be nicely profitable with plenty of cash for growth just from retained earnings.

Or, my back of the envelope arithmetic is that with common ad rates from ad networks, a $1000 server kept half busy 24 by 7 would generate $250,000 a month in revenue. For just one server, a cheap Internet connection, just one employee, that's a heck of a profit margin and plenty of cash for 10 more servers. Half fill those, say, in two spare bedrooms I have, with some window A/C units, some emergency power supplies and an emergency generator, and I will have annual revenue more than a VC seed or Series A equity check. And, "Look, Ma, 100% owner of just an LLC and no BoD!".

Sure, once I have the traction, VCs will call me, and then I will check and tell them about all the times I sent them e-mail they ignored and explain that my plane has already left the ground, has altitude, and is climbing quickly and it's too late to buy a ticket.

Sure, I typed in all the 25,000 programming language statements myself and implemented my math derivations in 100,000 lines of typing -- lots of in-line comments! The code is all in just Microsoft's Visual Basic .NET with ADO.NET for getting to SQL Server and ASP.NET for the Web pages with IIS for the Web server plus a little open source C called with Microsoft's platform invoke.

I wrote my own Web page session state store using two collection classes and some TCP/IP sockets with class de/serialization -- sure, could have used REDIS, but my code is so short and simple writing my own was likely easier. Besides, now I'm about to copy that code, rip out most of it, and get a log file server that I will like a lot better than what I'm using now from Microsoft.

Otherwise the code looks ready for at least first production, to, say, well past $250,000 a month in revenue. At IBM's Watson lab, I wrote AI code that shipped as a commercial IBM Program Product, and what I've written for my startup is more solid (got an IBM award for some of the code I wrote in an all night session -- let one of our programmers be done in the next afternoon instead of two weeks and got a MUCH nicer result for the customers -- trick was to do some things with entry variables to keep some run-time code on the stack of dynamic descendancy).

My project needs data, and I have a lot but need to get more.

Curiously, there's some good news: My development computer was crashing about five times a day, apparently a hardware problem, maybe on the motherboard. I did mud wrestling with it and, then, shopping for parts for a new computer. But my old computer now, for no good reason, is no longer crashing! The computer has plenty of free disk space for some more data. So, for now I get to set aside all the system management mud wrestling of getting a new computer and getting all the software moved to it and running, can review the most critical parts of my code a third time, write the log server, write some code to make working with SQL Server easier, get some more data, and do an alpha test, a beta test, and get some publicity. Maybe I will even go live with my development computer, get some revenue, and get a really nice first server.

The problem is important; the math is solid; the code is solid; I suspect a lot, at least enough, people will like the results (it's intended to please essentially everyone on the Internet), etc., but no VC in the country wants anything to do with my work now. Nothing. Zip, zilch, zero.

Lesson: To VCs, nothing but nothing matters but traction.

So, the flip side of that lesson is an

Opportunity: Be a solo founder where the traction the VCs want is enough for profitability and plenty of cash for organic growth.

The founder of Plenty of Fish was a solo founder who eventually sold out for $500+ million. Some old remarks by A16Z confirm the possibility of a one engineer unicorn -- at

http://a16z.com/2014/07/30/the-happy-demise-of-the-10x-engin...

with in part

"This is the new normal: fewer engineers and dollars to ship code to more users than ever before. The potential impact of the lone software engineer is soaring. How long before we have a billion-dollar acquisition offer for a one-engineer startup? "

I agree!

I saw the need -- obvious enough. I cooked up a new solution with a new UI, UX, and some new data to be just what some new math I derived needed. Easy enough -- I've worked harder single exercises in Rudin, Principles of Mathematical Analysis. The work was easier than my Master's paper, my Ph.D., and any of the papers I've published. I wrote the code for the math and checked it various ways including with programming those calculations again in another language to check. I designed the data base tables, the Web pages, and wrote the code for the Web pages. Then the code for the session state store. Then I got sick, then got well, then my computer got sick and got well, now I'm back to progress. So far, being a solo founder, nothing particularly difficult. No reason to need a co-founder.

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#74
post #28

The AI and Singularity hype irks me, because I'm genuinely in agreement with Peter Thiel's argument that technological progress is actually decelerating relative to how it was moving 60 years ago once you look beyond the advancements we have experienced in information technology and finance.

True that. 1880-1950 (70 years) took us from train-and-telegraph to jet-and-atom bomb. Horse and carriage was the top-tier tech for personal transportation in 1880, and they were just starting to understand that diseases are often caused by these little blobby creatures called germs. 1950-2020 (70 years) will take us much less distance. Almost everything we're developing seems to be about information processing. If y…

To reuse a point brought up quite often in this context, making predictions about when and if AGI might arrive based on extrapolations of current technological trends is like trying to predict when the atom bomb would have been created based on a chart of conventional explosive yields leading up to 1940. Undiscovered discoveries are not predictable, certainly not by extrapolating from the current progress. This applies to Kurzweil's highly optimistic predictions as much as it does to negative ones.

Whether or not it's likely we'll see AGI any time soon is, IMO, a matter of wild-ass-guessing more than anything else. There are no experts in AGI right now, only philosophers, because the field doesn't even exist. So nobody has any remotely educated guess about what algorithmic discoveries need to happen and whether they're in reach for human understanding, or when we'd have the computational power to exploit such algorithms if discovered.

All we can really say is that it's theoretically possible, we're living proof of that. Also that there must be a lot of intelligent needles in the algorithmic haystack if evolution was able to stumble across one without a clear fitness mandate to do so (most of the creatures that thrive don't have what we consider intelligence, so it's not that evolutionarily important). I'd probably bet on it being more a matter of "when?" than "if?", but I wouldn't make any assumptions about timescale other than "not this year, probably not next".

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#75
Most of the people who have a strong machine learning or deep learning background are actually unaware of the large amount of existing research that applies to artificial general intelligence (AGI) because that group is just not mainstream.

But there are groups who are combining cutting edge neural network research with AGI and seriously trying to build general intelligence. Researchers who are working on narrow AI tasks and are familiar with this will continue to be incredulous right up to (and possibly beyond) the point where they see a system that seems intelligent to them.

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#76
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from the camp the singularity already happened! ;)

I'm from the camp the singularity is a continuous process. When you travel away from the Sun, the light from it gets dimmer and dimmer and dimmer, until it becomes single photons appearing with more and more delays but on average energy of 'dimmer' light. Fly towards the Sun and there isn't a sudden cutoff point where it goes from dark to bright, or bright to incandescent, it's a continual increase. Same with life, l…

the whole premise of a singularity is that we will hit a point of exponential technological growth, extrapolated from the accelerating pace of technological development over human history and usually based on the idea that we'll make a self-iterating AI which will lead to runaway intelligence. The "singularity" specifically is intended as a tipping-point where the acceleration of technology becomes faster than human capability (i.e. the approaching-vertical line on an exponential curve).

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#77

Here is my annoyance with AI Hype: people seeking extra tailwinds pitch their startups as "ML companies" even with the most tangential usage of ML. It drowns out real ML companies. Most people cannot tell the difference. At a hackathon recently, someone pitched their app as an "ML-driven app" though the only ML in there was some 1-line language translation feature they were consuming off Watson REST services for a ta…

Difficulty level 1: The only ML in there was some 1-line language translation feature they were consuming off Watson REST services for a tangential feature on their app Difficulty level 2: Self-trained CNN on a custom dataset using TensorFlow and changes to start/end layers on the NN Difficulty level 3: Custom rolled 12 layer CNN trained with with novel hand labeled data. How many people to you think know the differe…

Why should people be able to tell the difference vs the outcome of those products, unless someone (investors?) is specifically just buying into the AI hype itself? (in which case, this is nothing different from when everything was "social")

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#78
post #28

The AI and Singularity hype irks me, because I'm genuinely in agreement with Peter Thiel's argument that technological progress is actually decelerating relative to how it was moving 60 years ago once you look beyond the advancements we have experienced in information technology and finance.

True that. 1880-1950 (70 years) took us from train-and-telegraph to jet-and-atom bomb. Horse and carriage was the top-tier tech for personal transportation in 1880, and they were just starting to understand that diseases are often caused by these little blobby creatures called germs. 1950-2020 (70 years) will take us much less distance. Almost everything we're developing seems to be about information processing. If y…

I don't think it's reasonable to equate 'technologies that existed since the 60s' with 'technologies that are ubiquitous today'.

I'm in the bottom 15% of my country (UK) by income and I have access to things like: near-instantaneous hot water at all times, affordable next-day delivery services from a pocket-sized device I carry around with me, international air travel that is affordable for me, efficient fridge/freezer technology, fresh groceries from around the world at every local convenience store.

And yes things look a lot less impressive if you filter out information-technology related things. But advancements will always look less impressive if you filter out the most impressive advancements. The fact that we are close to permanently connected across geographical boundaries now isn't something to be dismissed out of hand. The level of effectiveness and miniaturisation of communications devices (e.g. 'true wireless' earphones with mobile internet) is really approaching the point of being practical telepathy insofar as it can be used.

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#79
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True that. 1880-1950 (70 years) took us from train-and-telegraph to jet-and-atom bomb. Horse and carriage was the top-tier tech for personal transportation in 1880, and they were just starting to understand that diseases are often caused by these little blobby creatures called germs. 1950-2020 (70 years) will take us much less distance. Almost everything we're developing seems to be about information processing. If y…

To reuse a point brought up quite often in this context, making predictions about when and if AGI might arrive based on extrapolations of current technological trends is like trying to predict when the atom bomb would have been created based on a chart of conventional explosive yields leading up to 1940. Undiscovered discoveries are not predictable, certainly not by extrapolating from the current progress. This appli…

Actual real research in AGI was a thing when I was doing AI research in the late 1980s early 1990s (I got out just as the last AI Winter came along in the early 1990s.)

Consider things like SOAR - that was explicitly an architecture for general intelligence. Whether it was any good or not is another question - but there was an active good-old-fashioned AGI field back then.

Mind you - one of the reasons I left AI research to do web stuff from '92/'93 onwards was I was pretty sure the symbolic approaches in favour back then wouldn't scale up and that there really was only intelligence on one side of a computer screen.

Re: The AI Misinformation Epidemic

#80
post #14

From all I can see, nearly all the present AI boils down to one word -- hype. From what is really going on, nearly all of it looks like (1) in some cases a lot of new data, (2) some new, faster processor hardware, e.g., based on graphical processor units although the x86 processors are astoundingly fast anyway, able to manipulate the new data, (3) for what manipulations to do on the data, some tweaks of some of the w…

You give your work a catchy name because you want other people to help develop it, via attention, promotion, word of mouth, etc so other people can find it and fund it. To do so you speak in their terms and their terms are catchy one-liners. Don't be bitter about it, some people just don't have the level of concentration to deal with our specifics.
Post reply on HN