A better question would be why AI works great for some business (e.g. Netflix, AirBnB, Uber, Waze, Amazon) yet fails miserably for other (JC Penney, Sears). In my view, the older companies are trying to strap on AI on top of a traditional dataset, which never collected any useful signals. The new companies designed their entire business concepts around data, and collected what's needed from the get-go. Sears may have…
> Amazon applies A/B testing all the time - would anyone at Sears even know what it is? I wouldn't be so certain of others ignorance. Retail stores have long done studies and applied consultants to problems on layout, music, pricing, etc.
Why is AI so useless for business?
351–360 of 391 posts
Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#352Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
What you're picking up on is that the old school vision of how AI would be achieved (Minsky, Chomsky etc) had some early success with simple games (which they then touted as the forerunners of AI) and then stopped. Data driven ML approaches are completely different. Physics once held that there was a substance called aether rather than vacuum, and chemistry that fire came from phlogiston, but we didn't need to rename…
The existence of the aether isn't borne out by experiments; rather, we have justification in believing in its non-existence. The algorithms of AI of decades past still work. That's a big difference. E.g. SHRDLU can be built today and you can have a conversation with it about its world of blocks. Algorithms are artifacts of mathematics. To calculate distance between two points, we still use sqrt(dx^2 + dy^2); it doesn…
I don't get this hate for new techniques being classified as AI. Just because they learn distributions instead of using classic prolog?
Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
What you're picking up on is that the old school vision of how AI would be achieved (Minsky, Chomsky etc) had some early success with simple games (which they then touted as the forerunners of AI) and then stopped. Data driven ML approaches are completely different. Physics once held that there was a substance called aether rather than vacuum, and chemistry that fire came from phlogiston, but we didn't need to rename…
> Physics once held that there was a substance called aether rather than vacuum, and chemistry that fire came from phlogiston, but we didn't need to rename the discipline when reasoning evolved. The key difference being that physical theories based on aether never actually worked, whereas computer programs based on graph algorithms solved many problems they set out to solve.
Graph algorithms are not a subset of AI.
Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#355I’ve been working in the “real world business processes that companies are trying to AI-ify” realm for quite a while now. Pharma, cyber security, oil and gas production, etc. This article doesn’t mention a really, really straightforward factor for why AI hasn’t invaded these domains despite billions of dollars being dumped into them. An automated process only has to be wrong once to compel human operators to double o…
AI for pharma seems to be targeted at things like drug discovery, where yes every output from the algorithm has to be carefully validated. But that's already the case for human-generated ideas. So I don't think your argument makes sense in this context.
There are plenty of places where human validation shouldn’t be necessary, but is.
Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couple issues. (1) Optimization is much, much bigger than graph traversal and sorting. (2) Modern route-finding algorithms are to your on-paper-Dijkstra what a rocket ship is to your bicycle. (3) I think you're under the same misconception I'm talking about: graph traversal is absolutely a fundamental of AI. Ask anyone what the main AI textbook is, they'll tell you it's Russell and Norvig: http://aima.cs.berkeley.edu…
> (2) Modern route-finding algorithms are to your on-paper-Dijkstra what a rocket ship is to your bicycle. Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Modern path-finding algorithms are Dijkstra + lots of heuristics piled on top. > graph traversal is absolutely a fundamental of AI. I agree. But being a fundamental of AI does not make it AI itself.
Sometimes the heuristics ARE the point.
Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
But if the alternative medicine is widely known to work, it means the effect is powerful enough that a cheap RCT done at a local medical university should be more than enough to demonstrate it. If it can't, then frankly, you don't really know it works.
The point is that without a monetary payout at the end, you're going to have trouble incentivizing someone to do the study no matter how cheap it is. And don't forget the opposite, if there's a current medical treatment for the condition you're testing they will try to block you at every step.
Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
> have any insight to what you can actually deliver Maybe that's the problem. In lots of AI/ML problems you just CAN'T know ahead of time what can be deliver you need to spend the time and resources to do it and then see how well it works... The problem imo is on the business side, most businesses don't know how to transform unpredictable progress into profit (even if average on a large timeframe that progress might…
I would love to learn how unpredictability can be leveraged as a positive. Any tips?
- in a highly competitive market your actions can be unpredictable by competitors: evolution shows this can work even in the most primitive ways - it's so damn hard to swat a fly because it changes direction randomly, being smarter than it doesn't help... you could get supercharged versions of this advantage with random-AI-progress as long as you don't constrain business direction, eg. if your AI research suddenly produces breakthroughs that shows you can have an advantage on smart adult toys by applying you aerospace technology capabilities, then be willing to get in that space and play to win regardless of how much that makes sense (tip: you'll probably want to stay privately owned, markets will likely hate this "random pivoting" as it would look from outside) -- as business you'd be "the fly that no one can swat"
- use what's knows to be good at turning positive unpredictability into overall profits (markets), but internally - have multiple projects & people competing against each other inside a company, cheating antifragility / resilience, and really allow projects to fail (as in make it clear that you could be promoted even if the project/team you lead fails, so encourage the king of risk that would be too high even for a startup) etc. - you'll average out the unpredictibility and be left with the progress + antifragility -- as a business you'll be "the cockroach that survives after radiation, eg. unpredictability, has killed everything else"
Hint: all these are already happening, since before AI... and what you'll see now will be that AI/ML will bring most benefits to large corporations with multiple lines of business and multiple independent departments/subsidiaries competing agains each other, and startups-inside-corporations that until now were "pale fakes"... and probably investors already groked this too, there's a lot of growth in AI/ML applied deep inside the guts of big Cos... when this plays out to real wins, result will probably be pretty dystopic: SMBs will be wiped out, lots independent startups too probably (as a small/lone player you can't turn unpredictable progress into profits), you'll get even more centralization, and more mass-surveilance bc now it will not offer only national security advantages but also massive immediate business advantages with AI feeding on the data...
EDIT+: That's I think the problem we need to solve is how to de-centralize and spread the benefits of applying AI to business... bc it will naturally promote centralization and closed gardens, unpredictable progress is mostly toxic to each individual player alone... we need some business-version-of-democracy++, pure capitalism will result in a marriage of mega-corps + pseudo-totalitarian-govs since these will be the entities naturally thriving in the new landscape.
Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
> have any insight to what you can actually deliver Maybe that's the problem. In lots of AI/ML problems you just CAN'T know ahead of time what can be deliver you need to spend the time and resources to do it and then see how well it works... The problem imo is on the business side, most businesses don't know how to transform unpredictable progress into profit (even if average on a large timeframe that progress might…
"most businesses don't know how to transform unpredictable progress into profit" Unpredictable progress is lethal to businesses. As an example, it does not matter how brilliant Steve Jobs was or Elon Musk is, they both need to show regular results that build confidence from shareholders. About the only time you may not care for steady progress is if you have abundance of resources and clear goal like Bill Gates with…
At peace, or in a quasi steady state, yes. But not in all situations. Eg. in war or other adversarial situations you need to both be making progress and be as unpredictable as possible, in the hope that in some indefinite future you can exterminate and/or enslave the other players.
As the world is becoming more and more war-like, these types of strategies can become more and more advantageous. And you don't need actual military war or even physical violence. Actually it's even better without these, since non-military non-violent war-type adversarial state can be sustained forever!
In an arms race type of business situation, if your progress is predictable it means you're not moving fast enough, and somebody else will outrun you! And moving more from competing on marketshare (fighting for more from the same pie) to competing on progress would be awesome too.
I absolutely love unpredictable progress, and I'm really optimistic about the direction the world is evolving to... endless war and without (most of) the death and violence part will be a great catalyst for high-risk-high-reward technological and scientific progress! And as volatility increases maybe more and more of the businesses that depend on "the world staying stable and predictable" will be wiped out and create some breathing room and opportunity for new more flexible and open players. If predicting the future is no longer on the table, you need to invest in true agility, eg. ability to quickly change direction and speed when you glimpse a new future, maybe replace most specialists with teams of nimble quickly-retrainable AI-augmented-expert-generalists etc.
And back to the AI side... we need to stop playing the "predictions game", you never want to actually predict what will really happen in the real world, you want to predict what could have happened and then immediately interfere and change the direction of things to invalidate that prediction (sabotaging other players that probably also made the same prediction)... hopefully to produce a change in the direction you want... but if that can't work, "using AI to inject volatility and invalidate others' predictions" could be a valid business strategy too...
Re: Why is AI so useless for business?
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is that without a monetary payout at the end, you're going to have trouble incentivizing someone to do the study no matter how cheap it is. And don't forget the opposite, if there's a current medical treatment for the condition you're testing they will try to block you at every step.
Countries with socialized healthcare would be well incentivized to fund these studies.