131–140 of 581 posts
The current AI hype wave has really hit a nerd soft spot - that we're steps away from AGI. Surely if a computer can make plausible-looking but incorrect sentences we're days away from those sentences being factually accurate! The winter after this is gonna be harsh.
The current AI hype wave has really hit a nerd soft spot - that we're steps away from AGI. Surely if a computer can make plausible-looking but incorrect sentences we're days away from those sentences being factually accurate! The winter after this is gonna be harsh.
Reminds me of autonomous vehicles a couple of years back. Or even AI a couple of years back, remember Watson? The hype cycle was faster to close that time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
George Zarkadaki: In Our Own Image (2015) describes six metaphors people have used to explain human intelligence in the last two millennia. At first it was the gods infusing us with spirit. After that it's always been engineering: after the first water clocks and the qanat hydraulics seemed a good explanation of everything. The flow of different fluids in the body, the "humors" explained physical and mental function.…
That's interesting, but technology has always been about augmenting or mimicking human intelligence, though. The Turing test is literally about computers being able to mimic humans so well that real humans wouldn't be able to tell them apart. We're now past that point in some areas, but we never really prioritized thinking about what intelligence _actually_ is, and how we can best reproduce it. At the end of the day,…
This is just preposterous. You can be fooled if you have no knowledge in the area but that's about it. With current tech there is, there can not be anything novel. Guernica was novel. No matter how you train any probabilistic model on every piece of art produced before Guernica it'll never ever create it.
There are novel novels (sorry for the pun) every few years. They delight us with genuinely new turns of prose, unexpected plot twists etc.
Also harken to https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/this-one-important-fact-ab... which also happens to include a verb made up on spot.
And yes we have cars which move faster than a human can but they don't compete in high jumps or climb rock walls. Despite we have a fairly good idea about the mechanical workings of the human body, muscles and joints and all that we can't make a "tin man", not by far. As impressive as Boston Dynamics demos are they are still very very far from this.
The current AI hype wave has really hit a nerd soft spot - that we're steps away from AGI. Surely if a computer can make plausible-looking but incorrect sentences we're days away from those sentences being factually accurate! The winter after this is gonna be harsh.
AI (or more properly, ML) is all around us and creating value everywhere. This is true whether or not we EVER reach AGI. Honestly, I stop reading/listening whenever I read/hear mention of AGI.
He seems to be the same kind of individual as Musk: able to bring together teams that build great things, but also able to bring about drama and ego. The whole musical chair act with profit/non-profit OpenAI, and getting rid of many of the folks that created the models they are famous for.
The current AI hype wave has really hit a nerd soft spot - that we're steps away from AGI. Surely if a computer can make plausible-looking but incorrect sentences we're days away from those sentences being factually accurate! The winter after this is gonna be harsh.
The winter is going to be warm because of all the heat generated by GPUs ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, but I think the original article is more insightful about the complexity and reality of making chips, which TSMC knows well, compared to moonshots by people who don't fully understand the intricacies of the semiconductors supply chain.
Huh? What original article? The Toms Hardware article is a copy and paste of the NYT one.
The current AI hype wave has really hit a nerd soft spot - that we're steps away from AGI. Surely if a computer can make plausible-looking but incorrect sentences we're days away from those sentences being factually accurate! The winter after this is gonna be harsh.
Reminds me of autonomous vehicles a couple of years back. Or even AI a couple of years back, remember Watson? The hype cycle was faster to close that time.
It has taken 10+ years to get to present day, from the start of the "deep learning revolution" around 2010. I vaguely recall Uber promising self-driving pickups somewhere around 8-10 years ago. A main difference between current AI systems and the systems behind the cyclical hype cycles ongoing since the 1950s is that these systems are actually delivering impressive and useful results, increasingly so, to a much larger amount of people. Waymo alone services tens of thousands of autonomous rides per month (edit: see sibling comment, I was out of date, it's currently hundreds of thousands of rides per month -- but see, increasingly), and LLMs are waaaaay beyond the grandparent's flippant characterization of "plausible-looking but incorrect sentences". That's markov chains territory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no accounting for taste, but keep in mind that all of these services are currently losing money, so how much would you actually be willing to pay for the service you're currently getting in order to let it break even? There was a report that Microsoft is losing $20 for every $10 spent on Copilot subscriptions, with heavy users costing them as much as $80 per month. Assuming you're one of those heavy users, wo…
I would pay hundreds of dollars per month for the combination of cursor and claude - I could not get my head around it when my beginner lever colleague said "I just coded this whole thing using cursor". It was an entire web app, with search filters, tree based drag and drop GUIs, the backend api server, database migrations, auth and everything else. Not once did he need to ask me a question. When I asked him "how lon…
Personally I much prefer Chatgpt. I give it specific small problems to resolve and some context. At most 100 lines of code. If it gets more the quality goes to shit. In fact copilot feels like chatgpt that was given too much context.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no accounting for taste, but keep in mind that all of these services are currently losing money, so how much would you actually be willing to pay for the service you're currently getting in order to let it break even? There was a report that Microsoft is losing $20 for every $10 spent on Copilot subscriptions, with heavy users costing them as much as $80 per month. Assuming you're one of those heavy users, wo…
I would pay hundreds of dollars per month for the combination of cursor and claude - I could not get my head around it when my beginner lever colleague said "I just coded this whole thing using cursor". It was an entire web app, with search filters, tree based drag and drop GUIs, the backend api server, database migrations, auth and everything else. Not once did he need to ask me a question. When I asked him "how lon…
I've been impressed with the ability to generate "throw away" code for testing out an idea or rapidly prototyping something.