231–240 of 308 posts
Are you exaggerating what your AI product can do? no
Are you promising that your AI product does something better than a non-AI product? no
Are you aware of the risks? no
Does the product actually use AI at all? no
I would like to know how others are dealing with this. I am making a public health system and to deal with this I simply show results to the clinician or social worker etc... and have them manually approve the result before its applied to an end users protocol.
Your description sounds like you're training your reviewers to rubberstamp the system's results as correct. That is a horrible outcome. By the time something comes along they really need to question, they'll already have adapted to the system being pretty good and they won't even notice there was an issue. This problem is endemic to ML systems and cannot be patched away, so far as I can tell. We need fundamentally di…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> citizens of the united states aren't children You can't put it in these terms and not have a moment to reflect on what's happening in our technology sphere. In particular in regard to CEOs of companies directly involved in these dubious AI claims where customer's life is on the line I am deeply symapthic of the FTC's position in respect to trying to pass a message where common sense and formal communication have no…
It's important to put it in those terms even when there are bad actors, because there always will be. The US government isn't supposed to be our keeper, it's supposed to be of the people, by the people, for the people. Aside from the problematic medium, claiming something uses AI or is AI or has AI isn't a specific claim with respect to what the product can or cannot do. A product can do X or not. Whether someone pun…
Basically, outside of their tone, you seem to me 100% in agreement with the FTC's message here.
“It’s an ambiguous term with many possible definitions.” “Does the product actually use AI at all? If you think you can get away with baseless claims…” Last I checked basic optimization techniques like simulated annealing and gradient descent - as well as a host of basic statistical tools - are standard parts of an introductory AI textbook. I’ve been on the receiving end of government agency enforcement (SEC) and it…
None of the AI products use "AI". There is decidedly no actual artificial intelligence currently in existence.
We are working on an AI product in a highly regulated industry (Investing). Recently we have been experimenting using the GPT3 API as a Junior Equity Analyst. On an eyeball check the results of the technology are impressive. The problem is that there is no way to validate the feedback on scale. I.e., we can't receive statistics about the feedback from the API. In contrast, for our own Entity Recognition models we can…
GPT is a voluble, entertaining bullshitter that is occasionally correct. It is not reliable, and for now, it cannot be made reliable. It is a very impressive toy, but still just a toy for now.
It's almost always correct, otherwise it would be worthless.
Yes, it's possible to construct questions that lead to nonsensical answers, and sometimes nonsensical answers are given even to sensible questions, but saying that ChatGPT's answers are "occasionally" correct is weapons grade BS. ChatGPT is a hair's breadth from being an ultimate answer machine, and is far more likely to be correct on almost any question than the average human.
The FUD that is currently being manufactured around language models is insane. I guess we should all stop using search engines, since those are even less reliable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's important to put it in those terms even when there are bad actors, because there always will be. The US government isn't supposed to be our keeper, it's supposed to be of the people, by the people, for the people. Aside from the problematic medium, claiming something uses AI or is AI or has AI isn't a specific claim with respect to what the product can or cannot do. A product can do X or not. Whether someone pun…
I'm not sure to understand your point on what the product can actually do: this whole blog entry is about sticking the marketing claims to reality, what exactly the product does, and not make vague promises because it uses AI. Basically, outside of their tone, you seem to me 100% in agreement with the FTC's message here.
But, even outside that, claiming something is/has/uses AI is practically meaningless. It's not a concrete claim, so consumers of said product aren't damaged by such claim. A claim of risk free returns of 50% causes harm. A false claim of curing cancer causes harm. So no, I'm not in agreement with it. The FTC should find more important things to spend the time of their 1100 people on, especially when they don't even seem to understand the topic at hand.
“It’s an ambiguous term with many possible definitions.” “Does the product actually use AI at all? If you think you can get away with baseless claims…” Last I checked basic optimization techniques like simulated annealing and gradient descent - as well as a host of basic statistical tools - are standard parts of an introductory AI textbook. I’ve been on the receiving end of government agency enforcement (SEC) and it…
I find it hard to sympathize with companies whose websites are full of AI, blockchain, and quantum trash. Honestly, idgaf if they get shaken down. If you have a product that people like, just market your product based on its features, and remove all the BS about using . If the FTC tells OpenAI to stop mentioning AI, I would be surprised. Even if that happens, I am sure ChatGPT will remain just as popular.
“It’s an ambiguous term with many possible definitions.” “Does the product actually use AI at all? If you think you can get away with baseless claims…” Last I checked basic optimization techniques like simulated annealing and gradient descent - as well as a host of basic statistical tools - are standard parts of an introductory AI textbook. I’ve been on the receiving end of government agency enforcement (SEC) and it…
From their own report that they linked to: >In the 2021 Appropriations Act, Congress directed the Federal Trade Commission to study and report on whether and how artificial intelligence (AI) “may be used to identify, remove, or take any other appropriate action necessary to address” a wide variety of specified “online harms.” >We assume that Congress is less concerned with whether a given tool fits within a definitio…
“It’s an ambiguous term with many possible definitions.” “Does the product actually use AI at all? If you think you can get away with baseless claims…” Last I checked basic optimization techniques like simulated annealing and gradient descent - as well as a host of basic statistical tools - are standard parts of an introductory AI textbook. I’ve been on the receiving end of government agency enforcement (SEC) and it…
You can't use simulated annealing or gradient descent in your product and claim that you have built something intelligent. That would be laughable and validate these kind of messaging from the government. AI is indeed a very ambiguous and subjectively defined term. In my own personal subjective opinion anything that does not have survival instinct is not remotely intelligent. By that definition unicellular organisms…
“It’s an ambiguous term with many possible definitions.” “Does the product actually use AI at all? If you think you can get away with baseless claims…” Last I checked basic optimization techniques like simulated annealing and gradient descent - as well as a host of basic statistical tools - are standard parts of an introductory AI textbook. I’ve been on the receiving end of government agency enforcement (SEC) and it…
You can't use simulated annealing or gradient descent in your product and claim that you have built something intelligent. That would be laughable and validate these kind of messaging from the government. AI is indeed a very ambiguous and subjectively defined term. In my own personal subjective opinion anything that does not have survival instinct is not remotely intelligent. By that definition unicellular organisms…