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

AI is a horse (2024)

kconner.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 254 posts

Re: AI is a horse (2024)

#61

Post by torginus »

direwolf20 wrote: post #13
latexr wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like that used to be Apple’s driving force under Steve Jobs (definitely no longer under Tim Cook). https://youtube.com/watch?v=oeqPrUmVz-o&t=1m54s > You’ve go to start with the customer experience and work backwards to the technology. You can’t start with the technology and try to figure out where you’re going to try to sell it.

That works when you are starting a new company from scratch to solve a problem. When you're established and your boffins discover a new thing, of course you find places to use it. It's the expression problem with business: when you add a new customer experience you intersect it with all existing technology, and when you add a new technology you intersect it with all existing customer experience.

Apple was a well established company when they came out with the iPhone - I don't think anyone but Jobs would've been able to pull off something like that.

That sort of comprehensive innovation (hardware, software, UX - Apple invented everything), while entering an unfamilar and established market, I'd argue would've been impossible to do in a startup.

Re: AI is a horse (2024)

#63

Post by deltoidmaximus »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #32
BoredomIsFun wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> excellent show "halt and catch fire". I found it very caricature, too saturated with romance - which is untypical for tech environment, much like "big bang theory".

It's still very good I'd say. It shows the relation between big oil and tech: it began in Texas (with companies like Texas Instruments) then shifted to SV (btw first 3D demo I saw on a SGI, running in real time, was a 3D model of... An oil rig). As it spans many years, it shows the Commodore 64, the BBSes, time-sharing, the PC clone wars, the discovery of the Internet, the nascent VC industry etc. Everything is perio…

I never really could get into the Cameron/Joe romance, it felt like it was initially inserted to get sexy people doing sexy things onto the show and then had to be a star crossed lovers thing after character tweaks in season 2.

But when they changed the characters to be passionate stubborn people eventually started to cling to each other as they together rode the whirlwind of change the show really found its footing for me. And they did so without throwing away the events of season 1, instead having the 'takers' go on redemption arcs.

My only real complaint after re-watching really was it needed maybe another half season. I think the show should have ended with the .com bust and I didn't like that Joe sort of ran away when it was clear he'd attached himself to the group as his family by the end of the show.

Re: AI is a horse (2024)

#64

Post by ffsm8 »

Symmetry wrote: post #58
baxtr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe AI is a centaur??

After Deep Blue Garry Kapsparav proposed "Centaur Chess"[1] where teams of humans and computers would complete with each other. For about a decade a team like that was superior to either an unaided computer or an unaided AI. These days pure AI teams tend to be much stronger. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess

How would pure ai ever be "much stronger" in this scenario?

That doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever, it can only be "equally strong", making the approach non-viable because they're not providing any value... But the only way for the human in the loop to add an actual demerit, you'd have to include time taken for each move into the final score, which isn't normal in chess.

But I'm not knowledgeable on the topic, I'm just expressing my surprise and inability to contextualize this claim with my minor experience of the game

Re: AI is a horse (2024)

#66

Post by eightys3v3n »

jonplackett wrote: post #6

All true apart you can only lead it to water - it drinks ALL the water regardless of anything else.

Except when you want it to improve something in a particular way you already know about. Then god forbid it understands what you have asked and makes only that change :/

Some times I end up giving up trying to get the AI to build something following a particular architecture or fixing a particular problem in it's provious implementations.

Re: AI is a horse (2024)

#67

Post by kylec »

throw310822 wrote: post #56

Famously Steve Jobs said that the (personal) computer is "like a bicycle for the mind". It's a great metaphor because- besides the idea of lightness and freedom it communicates- it also described the computer as multiplier of the human strength- the bicycle allows one to travel faster and with much less effort, it's true, but ultimately the source of its power is still entirely in the muscles of the cyclist- you don'…

A tractor does exactly what you tell it to do though - you turn it on, steer it in a direction, and it goes. I like the horse metaphor for AI better: still useful, but sometimes unpredictable, and needs constant supervision.

Re: AI is a horse (2024)

#69

Post by maypop »

throw310822 wrote: post #56

Famously Steve Jobs said that the (personal) computer is "like a bicycle for the mind". It's a great metaphor because- besides the idea of lightness and freedom it communicates- it also described the computer as multiplier of the human strength- the bicycle allows one to travel faster and with much less effort, it's true, but ultimately the source of its power is still entirely in the muscles of the cyclist- you don'…

Having recently watched Train Dreams it feels like the transition of logging by hand to logging with industrial machinery.

Re: AI is a horse (2024)

#70

Post by Symmetry »

ffsm8 wrote: post #64
Symmetry wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After Deep Blue Garry Kapsparav proposed "Centaur Chess"[1] where teams of humans and computers would complete with each other. For about a decade a team like that was superior to either an unaided computer or an unaided AI. These days pure AI teams tend to be much stronger. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess

How would pure ai ever be "much stronger" in this scenario? That doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever, it can only be "equally strong", making the approach non-viable because they're not providing any value... But the only way for the human in the loop to add an actual demerit, you'd have to include time taken for each move into the final score, which isn't normal in chess. But I'm not knowledgeable on the topic,…

If you had a setup where the computer just did its thing and never waited for the human to provide input but the human still had an unused button they could press to get a chance to say something that might technically count as "centaur", but that isn't really what people mean by the term. It's the delay in waiting for human input that's the big disadvantage centaur setups have when the human isn't really providing any value these days.
Post reply on HN