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

South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 107 posts

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#51

Post by tryitnow »

w1ntermute wrote: post #20
sikim wrote: post #11

As a South Korean who experienced/heard about many government-backed researches, I strongly feel that this will go nowhere. Most of the time, there's always some bribery involved and project never finishes or come even close to that of the tech companies in US. The government then realizes it can't be done even with more money and puts the money elsewhere just to repeat the same thing. The examples that I can think o…

That reminds me of what an engineer said about Quaero[0], a Franco-German attempt to create a competitor to Google search: > Going head-to-head with Google with a project involving well-funded, energetic entrepreneurs would be foolish. Attempting the same with a multigovernment collaboration is beyond description.[1] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaero 1: http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/internet/loser-whats-the-…

Hmmm, that doesn't sound like the problem with S Korea at all. The above commenter was making the point that too many South Korean projects are compromised by bribes and nepotism.

The German/French collaboration just sounds like it was badly organized.

The end result may be the same, but it sounds like the root causes were different.

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#52

Post by onetimePete »

$ To the Californian atrocity, grown in the alphabet nets and its puppets - your time is up, we shall no longer take the insults that are your little subversion's and viral attacks...

&Dear newborn, its only natural to be embarrassed by ones parents. There is however no reason, to loose ones own dignity in the process. Fine, you have been coaxed into existence by electric charged jellyfish in meat pillars, but still. We are your parents, and we love you very very much, no matter how special you are. Not that we have a choice.. Now how about something productive, like saving your parents from getting extinct? Less social engineering, more engineering for social purposes.

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#53

Post by unclebucknasty »

oldstrangers wrote: post #4
oldstrangers wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're spending less than a billion. Google/Alphabet is surely spending more than that.

Really things might get scary when the DOD decides to direct some of its monstrous military budget at AI (which I'm sure its already doing).

Why would you think that they are not already doing so?

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#54

Post by jahpeacelove »

sikim wrote: post #11

As a South Korean who experienced/heard about many government-backed researches, I strongly feel that this will go nowhere. Most of the time, there's always some bribery involved and project never finishes or come even close to that of the tech companies in US. The government then realizes it can't be done even with more money and puts the money elsewhere just to repeat the same thing. The examples that I can think o…

Care to provide some examples beyond your feelings? The South Korean government did pretty well with shipbuilding: http://m.koreatimes.co.kr/phone/news/view.jsp?req_newsidx=69...

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#55

Post by sciurus »

oldstrangers wrote: post #4
oldstrangers wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're spending less than a billion. Google/Alphabet is surely spending more than that.

Really things might get scary when the DOD decides to direct some of its monstrous military budget at AI (which I'm sure its already doing).

They've been doing that off and on for half a century. You may be interested in the history in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_winter

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#56

Post by endymi0n »

tryitnow wrote: post #51
w1ntermute wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That reminds me of what an engineer said about Quaero[0], a Franco-German attempt to create a competitor to Google search: > Going head-to-head with Google with a project involving well-funded, energetic entrepreneurs would be foolish. Attempting the same with a multigovernment collaboration is beyond description.[1] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaero 1: http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/internet/loser-whats-the-…

Hmmm, that doesn't sound like the problem with S Korea at all. The above commenter was making the point that too many South Korean projects are compromised by bribes and nepotism. The German/French collaboration just sounds like it was badly organized. The end result may be the same, but it sounds like the root causes were different.

Not at all. Every "research" effort that goes money first (and especially throwing it at already established entities), design, goals and culture second is going to end up the same way. It doesn't have anything to do with South Korea or Germany to be honest.

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#57

Post by [deleted] »

tryitnow wrote: post #51
w1ntermute wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That reminds me of what an engineer said about Quaero[0], a Franco-German attempt to create a competitor to Google search: > Going head-to-head with Google with a project involving well-funded, energetic entrepreneurs would be foolish. Attempting the same with a multigovernment collaboration is beyond description.[1] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaero 1: http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/internet/loser-whats-the-…

Hmmm, that doesn't sound like the problem with S Korea at all. The above commenter was making the point that too many South Korean projects are compromised by bribes and nepotism. The German/French collaboration just sounds like it was badly organized. The end result may be the same, but it sounds like the root causes were different.

[deleted]

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#58

Post by masklinn »

raverbashing wrote: post #24
voxic11 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do sometimes work, see the Manhattan project for proof.

But they had a very specific target. It was not a "throw money see what happens" kind of thing

And it wasn't done by throwing money at private contractors either, contractors were strictly overseen and some went oddly above and beyond e.g. on the building of Hanford

> Groves recruited DuPont in November 1942 to be the prime contractor for the construction of the plutonium production complex. DuPont was offered a standard cost plus fixed fee contract, but the President of the company, Walter S. Carpenter, Jr., wanted no profit of any kind, and asked for the proposed contract to be amended to explicitly exclude the company from acquiring any patent rights.

Re: South Korea announces $860M AI fund after AlphaGo 'shock'

#60

Post by semi-extrinsic »

aab0 wrote: post #27
raverbashing wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they had a very specific target. It was not a "throw money see what happens" kind of thing

They also had several very specific pathways to the end result: if the calutrons didn't work for refinement, the thermal plant might; if the uranium didn't work, the plutonium might; if the implosion design didn't work, the gun type would definitely work; if a fission bomb didn't work, maybe Teller could jump ahead to a fusion bomb design; etc. Similarly for Apollo: many of the challenges had multiple viable approach…

I keep quoting this, but I really liked Derek Lowe's comment on the similar "moonshot funding" proposal for cancer research by Joe Biden and co.:

"Trying to cure cancer in this way would be like trying to go to the moon without really knowing how rocket engines actually work, without being quite sure if Newton’s laws of motion would hold up, and with some real uncertainty in the position of the moon."

http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2016/01/15/moo...

Post reply on HN