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

We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

calpaterson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 427 posts

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#371

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

dheera wrote: post #134
sseagull wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't this also the story of a dating site (whose name escapes me. OKCupid? PoF?)? Original owner wrote an article about how paying for a dating site is a bad idea. Money is offered, article disappears. Searching is failing me at the moment edit: Was OKCupid: https://www.themarysue.com/okcupid-pulls-why-you-should-neve...

From the article > 12-moth plan > 6-month plan Why would a dating site have a 12-month plan, and why would a user of a dating site want a 12-month plan? Not only would you hopefully want to be off the site within 12 months, as soon as you found someone compatible, you would hopefully delete the app, but you've unnecessarily paid for months you will (hopefully) never use. I don't understand why anything but month-to-m…

This is an open secret, but many (most?) "dating" sites are just ubertized prostitution providers.

In this context, a "12 month plan" is just their bulk discount.

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#372

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

langitbiru wrote: post #370
dheera wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article > 12-moth plan > 6-month plan Why would a dating site have a 12-month plan, and why would a user of a dating site want a 12-month plan? Not only would you hopefully want to be off the site within 12 months, as soon as you found someone compatible, you would hopefully delete the app, but you've unnecessarily paid for months you will (hopefully) never use. I don't understand why anything but month-to-m…

I'm building a dating app, SwanLove ( https://swan.love ). It's still in MVP mode and centralized mode. I'm thinking of pivoting into this kind of business model: B2B. So I make my dating app something like GitLab or WordPress. You can install it and host it yourself. You pay me every month if your users exceeds 100. Say, you are a priest or a gym owner. You have a community. You want your people in the community (ch…

Dating apps and websites depend on proprietary technology, network effects, economies of scale, and branding in order to lead. As such, they are very prone to becoming monopolies, and a market leader wouldn't be likely to use someone else's SaaS app. I'm just not sure there is the demand for 1000 semi-large dating apps unless tech isolationism somehow becomes the norm, and it that happens then it would include SaaS isolationism.

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#373

Post by Aethelwulf »

langitbiru wrote: post #370
dheera wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article > 12-moth plan > 6-month plan Why would a dating site have a 12-month plan, and why would a user of a dating site want a 12-month plan? Not only would you hopefully want to be off the site within 12 months, as soon as you found someone compatible, you would hopefully delete the app, but you've unnecessarily paid for months you will (hopefully) never use. I don't understand why anything but month-to-m…

I'm building a dating app, SwanLove ( https://swan.love ). It's still in MVP mode and centralized mode. I'm thinking of pivoting into this kind of business model: B2B. So I make my dating app something like GitLab or WordPress. You can install it and host it yourself. You pay me every month if your users exceeds 100. Say, you are a priest or a gym owner. You have a community. You want your people in the community (ch…

There are already white-label dating-site providers out there. Most of the "specialised" sites (e.g. uniform-wearers, "professionals") are running on them.

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#374

Post by Borrible »

shkkmo wrote: post #256
wildermuthn wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As convoluted as this comment is, props for pointing out that evolution (and the formation of the solar system) took billions of years to produce intelligence. Can humanity do it in less time? Because biological evolution’s is oriented toward propagation of DNA rather than intelligence, we can ask what kind of evolutionary pressures lead to intelligence. Under what scenarios does higher intelligence lead to higher su…

I think that the role that human "instincts" play in the development of intelligence in our brain is very important. Social behavior is a key part of that. We do see high levels of intelligence in non-mammal species, like crows, but they tend to also be very social creatures. The main counter example I can think of would be the octopus. I think that even if we crack "general intelligence" and can make something that…

Yes, Octopi are beautiful minds.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_Minds:_The_Octopus,_th...

I stopped eating them some 20 years ago. The time I realized, they are quite intelligent and probably the most tragic intelligence on this planet.

Given just such a short life time and most of it loners.

Yet their body and nervous system have such great potential.

Yes, I know it's sentimental humanizing, but I love Elora & Egbert.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1twqEn8iHsk

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#375

Post by IQunder130 »

dheera wrote: post #134
sseagull wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't this also the story of a dating site (whose name escapes me. OKCupid? PoF?)? Original owner wrote an article about how paying for a dating site is a bad idea. Money is offered, article disappears. Searching is failing me at the moment edit: Was OKCupid: https://www.themarysue.com/okcupid-pulls-why-you-should-neve...

From the article > 12-moth plan > 6-month plan Why would a dating site have a 12-month plan, and why would a user of a dating site want a 12-month plan? Not only would you hopefully want to be off the site within 12 months, as soon as you found someone compatible, you would hopefully delete the app, but you've unnecessarily paid for months you will (hopefully) never use. I don't understand why anything but month-to-m…

Wanting to be done in under 12 months and actually being done in under 12 months are two very different things.

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#376

Post by IQunder130 »

dheera wrote: post #315
bayesianbot wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of dating sites at least in Scandinavia/central europe, where men pay per message (or usually buy message packs, it ends up being around 1€ a message IIRC). The (mostly) men answering these messages, pretending to be women, get paid around 0.15€ per reply. And obviously writing messages where they try to prolong the conversation and turn down real life meetings or changing to other (free) messaging sy…

Why does the system charge men and pay women to message, instead of just charging everyone to message? I would have thought that of all places Scandinavia would not price-discriminate users based on their gender ...

If you're running a business things like actually pricing based on the market you've got rather than the one people idealistically wish you had start to make a lot of sense.

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#377

Post by IQunder130 »

dheera wrote: post #363
dkarras wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if you made women pay, the pool of women would shrink considerably and there would not be enough women for men to message to. Ideologies of gender equality aside, simple observation shows that dating is a women's market. Not even just with humans as biologically, women have a lot more to risk (risk of pregnancy, risks associated with being physically weaker etc.) so they choose while men present themselves an…

... until the men who woefully find out that there aren't enough women get off the platform and find a ton of available women? Or until the women find out that all the men are online and figure out that maybe they need to get an account too? I mean, the numbers are still close to 1:1 so ultimately it should work out if you treat men and women equally. If you make men pay you are only propagating stereotypes that men…

They charge men because presumably men will pay.

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#378

Post by IQunder130 »

cratermoon wrote: post #342
imtringued wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you wanted to go down this route you would pay per date, otherwise what are you paying for? Sure, the algorithm may jinx it by sending you on more bad dates than you wanted, but it would get you further than just a message.

> pay per date Hmm, I'm pretty sure that's been a business model for a very long time.

We need an uber for ____

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#379

Post by xondono »

jayd16 wrote: post #323
ajani wrote: post #251

The misunderstanding that leads to belief in strong AI is that meaning is somehow embedded in the symbols used to communicate it. Meaning is a natural process that occurs inside each of us, speech is just a symbol of that meaning, text is a symbol of that speech. Further, meaning is an ever-evolving, ever-mutating process much like the universe. Training on symbols cannot arrive at meaning, since the meaning isn’t co…

...what? How is this different than saying you can't learn from reading a book because its just symbols. The best I can decipher is that your argument begs the question, ie you're saying machine learning can't derive meaning from symbols because machine learning doesn't derive meaning from symbols.

One of my physics professors used to make a joke every year about how we could read every athletics book written, but we would not start to win races until we hit the track (at some point he made a fun video of him studying “how to run” to show the first day of class).

I interpret this in a similar way. Reading F=ma means nothing, even if you know what each letter stands for, is understanding the consequences what gives you meaning.

Re: We were promised Strong AI, but instead we got metadata analysis

#380

Post by pjmorris »

simonh wrote: post #357
pjmorris wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The butcher and baker a) have to understand what it takes to produce quality meats and breads and b) stand face to face with the customer, so they have both professional and reputational stakes in the game. Their stakeholder brothers and sisters may or may not have the same knowledge or reputational risk, and so their self-interested measures may correlate more with what puts money in their pockets in the short term…

Shareholders don’t care about the reputation or quality of service of the company? That seems a stretch. As I’ve commented elsewhere I don’t entirely agree with Friedman because I think some social spending can make commercial sense for a company, but I think what he’s saying is just a pretty direct refinement of the exact same points Smith made.

> Shareholders don’t care about the reputation or quality of service of the company? That seems a stretch.

It is a stretch beyond what I am arguing. On the other hand, I don't think it is a stretch to say that you are arguing that every shareholder has quality and reputation concerns indistinguishable from that of the direct proprietor. I claim that that is what would be necessary for Friedman and Smith to be saying the same thing.

Post reply on HN