201–210 of 518 posts
I think that we will have AI Winter once we see the true limitations that face us having a level 5 fully autonomous self driving car. The other thing we will see happen is the deflation of the AdTech bubble. Once we see both of these events occurring that should start the AI Winter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't test most of high end physics at home. I hope that doesn't mean you don't believe it!
A lab publishes an exciting result, what does the physics community do? Wait for replication. Or if you’re LHC, be very careful what you publish.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess there are reasons why researchers build chess programs: it is easy to compare performance between algorithms. When you can solve chess, you can solve a whole class of decision-making problems. Consider it as the perfect lab.
When you can solve chess, you can solve a whole class of decision-making problems If this were true, there would be a vast demand for grandmasters in commerce, government, the military... and there just isn’t. Poker players suffer from similar delusions about how their game can be generalised to other domains.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not like humanity really needs another chess playing program 20 years after IBM solved that problem (but now utilizing 1000x more compute power). I just find all these game playing contraptions really uninteresting. There are plenty real world problems to be solved of much higher practicality. Moravec's paradox in full glow.
I think for most people, the research interest in games of various sorts, is not simply a desire for a better and better game contraption, a better mousetrap. But rather the thinking is, "playing games takes intelligence, what can we learn about intelligence by building machines that play games?" Most games are also closed systems, and conveniently grokkable systems, with enumerable search spaces. Which gives us easi…
And comparing Alpha Go Zero against those "other chess programs that existed for 30 years" is exactly missing the point also. Those programs were not constructed with zero-knowledge. They were carefully crafted by human players to achieve the result. Are we also going to count in all the brain processing power and the time spent by those researchers to learn to play chess? Alpha Go Zero did not need any of that, besides the knowledge about the basic rules of the game. Who compare compute requirements for 2 programs that have fundamentally different goals and achievements? One is carefully crafted by human intervention. The other one learns a new game without prior knowledge...
I'm sorry but it feels really good to be true about many things like Blockchain and AI/ML hype, get ostracized for having such opinions by communities like HN and Reddit, wait few years and then find out that they have all jumped ships when you didn't check. You first-worlders need to stop blowing smoke up your asses and wind down a little bit. Next "big" thing to be killed by reality: Quantum computers (another BS m…
The difference between Blockchain advocates and the thieves from the tale "The Emperor's New Clothes" is that the weavers from the tale knew they were bullshitting the king. Sadly blockchains will not revolutionize mankind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also why does every single result has to be breathtaking? Here's a quick example, at IO they announced that their work on Android improved battery life by up to 30%. That's pretty damn impressive.
> Also why does every single result has to be breathtaking? If you build the hype like say Andrew Ng it better be. Also if you consume more money per month than all the CS departments of a mid sized country, it better be.
For instance: even if Elon Musk doesn't colonize Mars but instead just builds the BFR, that would still be amazing; even if BFR is never build but falcon 9 becomes fully reusable that would be great; even if falcon 9 won't be fully reusable, the fact that it cut the launching cost to space is still pretty good.
Even if we don't achieve any great breakthroughs with AGI, the fact that we started to use transfer learning to diagnose human disseases is pretty amazing; the fact that a japanese guy used tensorflow on a raspbery pi to categorize real cucumbers by shape is amazing.
All of this stuff won't go away; people will not say "hey, let's just forget about this deep learning thing and put it in some dusty shelf, it's useless for now". Maybe it will take 20 or 50 more years, maybe it's a slow thaw, but how could this be a winter?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Funding for this basic science isn't going away. What make this 3rd/4th boom in AI different? The other AI winter, the funding for these science went from well funded to little funding. I'm skeptical, with respect of course, on your statement because it doesn't have anything to back that up other than it produce useful technologies. Wouldn't this statement imply that the other previous AI which experience AI Winter…
Strangely enough he didn’t speak at all about waymo self driving cars that are already hauling passengers without a safety driver. Given that he needs to hide the facts that go against his narrative I don’t really think that what he is convinced of will become reality.
The inconvenient but amazing truth about deep learning is that, unlike neural networks, the brain does not learn complex patterns. It can see new complex patterns and objects instantly without learning them. Besides, there are not enough neurons in the brain to learn every pattern we encounter in life. Not even close. The brain does not model the world. It learns to see it.
This post is very uninformed. "It can see new complex patterns and objects instantly without learning them." Except, it doesn't. It is clearly false. When animals grow up in an environment without certain patterns, they will be unable to see these patterns (or complex combinations of these) at a later stage. We see complex patterns as combinations of patterns we have seen before and semantically encode them as such.…
/shrug people need time to research; Anyway i also don't get what the issue is with the model from radiology. It is already that good?! This is impressive. One model is close to well trained experts. Just today i had an small idea for a new product based on what google was showing with the capabilities to distinguis two people talking in parallel. At the last Google IO i was impressed because in comparision to the pr…
Warning 23 year old CS grad angst ridden post: I'm very sick of the AI hype train. I took a PR class for my last year of college, and they couldn't help but mention it. LG Smart TV ads mention it, Microsoft commercials, my 60 year old tech illiterate Dad. Do any end users really know what it's about? Probably not, nor should that matter, but it's very triggering to see something that was once a big part of CS turned…
I'm in same boat, except now I have to deal with both this and blockchain. It's pretty clear to everyone pushing this is being dishonest. Sometimes I wonder if they intentionally being dishonest or if they just don't know what they don't know. Very few people are doing useful true machine learning, and the applications are very specific with its own set of quirks. It's just to make some quick money and get out. What…
It's absolutely human nature to think of crazy ways of using things in new ways, probably most of those ways don't work out in the end.