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

Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 270 posts

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#231

Post by parasubvert »

DrNuke wrote: post #223
parasubvert wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You would want to support your local communities / markets maybe, now risking to become invisible or outpowered? " With Amazon, sure, there's a point, but that battle was lost 30 years ago with Wal-Mart when U.S. consumers decided they didn't give a shit about their local community, they wanted "low prices". Not everywhere, mind you. "Very sad and dangerous for evolution a fully Googled or a fully Amazoned or a what…

In principle we are going towards some sort of consolidation aka biodiversity annihilation worldwide, so that there will be 5-7 corporations / governments deciding for we all. It would be good if, say, they had a global superior mission (for example: space colonisation). It is not good if they only act for their own shareholders or bureaucrats (who are they? what they want from us if not enslavement and control?). Yo…

"In principle we are going towards some sort of consolidation aka biodiversity annihilation worldwide, so that there will be 5-7 corporations / governments deciding for we all."

I see very limited evidence of this.

"It is not good if they only act for their own shareholders or bureaucrats (who are they? what they want from us if not enslavement and control?)"

Most shareholders are you and your neighbours. I.e. mutual and pension funds. As an example, nearly all Canadians are all shareholders in various global companies via the CPP, one of the world's largest investors. My mother was an Ontario school teacher and is thus a shareholder in many companies, administered by one of the world's largest institutional investors (OTPP).

Most people who own equity don't want enslavement or control, they just want a return on the money they put in over their lives. Some senior management OTOH do want control/power, and enrich themselves in the process, and top management pay/power remains an open problem.

"You don't need fascism or communism in the given forms, it is the principle from which they arise that is emerging from these global consolidations again."

Again, I don't see this, sorry. The world is not consolidating, it is breaking apart, from my view. And Monopolies are always temporary at best (a few decades).

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#232

Post by pron »

ilaksh wrote: post #114
pron wrote: post #19

Calling simple statistical clustering algorithms that are tweaked by lots of trial-and-error heuristics "AI" feels like calling those slow two-wheeled electric self-balancing skateboards "hoverboards". Sometimes marketing can be too dramatic.

Deep learning is not a simple statistical clustering algorithm. Trial and error is a main way that people learn and it works.

P.S.

I don't deny that it works, but it isn't AI (not that statistical clustering isn't possibly a foundation for AI -- we have no idea -- but the current state-of-the-art is a far cry from the sci-fi meaning of the term).

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#233

Post by bkjsbkjdnf »

parasubvert wrote: post #230
bkjsbkjdnf wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean, personally I feel a lot safer managing my own data privacy with what I give these companies, rather than having a government do it for me What a fallacious statement. How is government oversight of these companies going to prevent you from applying your own magical 'data privacy management' spells?

"How is government oversight of these companies going to prevent you from applying your own magical 'data privacy management' spells?" That depends on what is being overseen by the government. I have no issue with EU-style or Canadian-style privacy regs for PII. I think that encourages local innovation by ensuring data can stay within a legal geographical territory. Where I take issue is "AI is scary, please stop the…

> That depends on what is being overseen by the government.

You must have had something in mind when you generated that bit of fallacious rhetoric.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#234

Post by codyb »

bloudermilk wrote: post #217
tdkl wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you lost touch with people because you don't visit certain pieces of HTML code anymore, then they're not your friends. Facebook has skewed the notion of what a "friend" actually is, that's the main part of keeping people behind their fence.

As someone who's left Facebook, I respectfully disagree. Without a backup plan in place to keep in touch, quitting FB was akin to losing a large chunk of my address book. Facebook was simply my only means of communication for a significant portion of my acquaintances. It's not about some philosophical debate about what a "friend" is.

I just went through and unfollowed literally every person and group on the site. Then I deleted all my photos (which were very few to begin with) except a photo of an object that looks like a face but isn't me and a photo of the nyc skyline for that longe one (after downloading them all). Untagged myself in everything, deleted every status and post on my wall. Oh yea and every piece of information besides my name. Then I locked down all privacy settings.

Now I have AOL instant messenger again, except I barely use it.

To be honest, the site is so very much better that way. None of the bullshit memes (which can be rather infuriating), no one can pretend to be me by taking my account.

Soon I'll do it with Twitter which is the only other social media I'm on.

It's very refreshing.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#235

Post by eternalban »

newscracker wrote: post #202
Razengan wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, Alphabet its influence and reach is far, far beyond that of Apple. Its just not as flashy & visible. You just gave some very "flashy & visible" examples of Alphabet's influence while citing only a "big pile of cash" as Apple's flashy & visible trait. Apple have always been the most secretive and they almost NEVER announce something before they're ready to advertise it. Did anybody see the New Mac Pro redes…

I agree with almost everything you said, except this part. > I think the winds of the world are changing direction; people are becoming increasingly aware about privacy concerns, and these issues keep making the headlines. It seems like only a minority cares about privacy concerns to even understand them well and take some action. Even when privacy issues make the headlines, billions of people just shrug their should…

> billions of people just shrug their shoulders

As they have been doing from the beginning. The masses only act contrary to top level input when desperately hungry. Even their righteous anger is scripted and handed down.

What has been the problem is that the critical non-elite core (say 10%) of society was ignorant of the consequences of these technologies and they are now getting a better sense.

We only have to educate the 10% and only need to provide secure software for these same 10%. Societies change when the 10% no longer accepts the rule of the 1%. This is the primary critique against geek efforts to get "grandma" using crypto. If grandma is part of the 10%, she'll be able to follow step by step instructions.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#236

Post by ghostDancer »

mbrock wrote: post #145
ladzoppelin wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: "The group plans to make discussions and minutes from meetings publicly available." I guess that is cool. But what about the competitive advantage these companies have right now? Does anybody monitor that stuff? I am not talking robots and singularity crap but rather companies that have means and the ability to make every decision with ML and the data to create an insurmountable competitive advantage.

...except for the secret meetings. Those records will be secret.

Those won't be called meetings but gatherings and exchanges of ideas,so they won't have to be publicly available.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#237

Post by JamesBarney »

sharemywin wrote: post #228
JamesBarney wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think of this as Google is great at creating value, and Apple is great at capturing value.

Google captures a lot of value in search ads.

This is total speculation but I imagine that Google captures less of the value it creates than Apple does.

If Android makes up 90% of the market share and is half as valuable as an iPhone and Google was capturing the same % of value created Google would have revenue numbers from android that are larger than Apples from the iPhone. But it's not even comparable.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#238

Post by weaksauce »

Taek wrote: post #164
thr0waway1239 wrote: post #138

I was starting to get worried about the data collection already happening individually at these big companies. Now that they have announced a partnership which potentially combines all this data together, I feel so much better! The funny thing is, the companies are ALWAYS going to put a positive spin on this. Not very different from the WhatsApp "we won't show ads, ever" messaging. Now I am in the camp which says "Fo…

Modern machine learning depends heavily on data. If you have 100x the data, your algorithm is going to outperform a superior algorithm in most cases, because the data is the source of the intelligence. It's a big, scary barrier for startups, for innovation, and we're running the risk of creating data superpowers that can't be competed with. Some algorithms don't perform well until they have a threshold of data. When…

> But we do know that they are using their position to manipulate ISIS recruitment, which means they aren't afraid to get their hands dirty with this kind of stuff

To be fair, Google is not cooking the search results, a company under their wing(jigsaw, formerly ideas) is buying ads on search terms related to terrorism. How good a buy deal they get is one thing to consider and I heard there was a grant of Adwords money to that company for this so there is that aspect as well. Buying ads is a whole lot different in my mind than changing the search result algorithm bias. The latter to the two would be a game changing thing.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#239

Post by AsyncAwait »

Taek wrote: post #164
thr0waway1239 wrote: post #138

I was starting to get worried about the data collection already happening individually at these big companies. Now that they have announced a partnership which potentially combines all this data together, I feel so much better! The funny thing is, the companies are ALWAYS going to put a positive spin on this. Not very different from the WhatsApp "we won't show ads, ever" messaging. Now I am in the camp which says "Fo…

Modern machine learning depends heavily on data. If you have 100x the data, your algorithm is going to outperform a superior algorithm in most cases, because the data is the source of the intelligence. It's a big, scary barrier for startups, for innovation, and we're running the risk of creating data superpowers that can't be competed with. Some algorithms don't perform well until they have a threshold of data. When…

> Did Google start putting a liberal spin on search results to try to influence the election?

The fact that you think that one of the 2016 presidential nominees is a "liberal" is sad.

Don't rely on labels people give themselves, examine their record.

Re: Facebook, Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft Create Partnership on AI

#240

Post by AsyncAwait »

parasubvert wrote: post #230
bkjsbkjdnf wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean, personally I feel a lot safer managing my own data privacy with what I give these companies, rather than having a government do it for me What a fallacious statement. How is government oversight of these companies going to prevent you from applying your own magical 'data privacy management' spells?

"How is government oversight of these companies going to prevent you from applying your own magical 'data privacy management' spells?" That depends on what is being overseen by the government. I have no issue with EU-style or Canadian-style privacy regs for PII. I think that encourages local innovation by ensuring data can stay within a legal geographical territory. Where I take issue is "AI is scary, please stop the…

> Where I take issue is "AI is scary, please stop these companies from doing things"

That's my issue with people like Elon Musk & Sam Altman starting OpenAI, where "Many of the employees and board members are motivated by concerns about existential risk from artificial general intelligence."[1] and also people like Stephen Hawking raising concern about AI of the "Skynet is coming, panic!" style, (he also warned not to respond to aliens a few days ago), it just seems like a lot of the rhetoric is about a state of AI we're most likely 500+ years away from, while it may actually slow down useful research that will lead us there faster...

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI

Post reply on HN