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

The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

thinkinggamefilm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 149 posts

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#71

Post by verisimi »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #65
beginnings wrote: post #54

i tried to watch it but like AI in general, it was extraordinarily boring. neural nets are really cool technically, but the whole AI thing is just getting old and I couldnt care less where its going we can guarantee that whether its the birth of superintelligence or just a very powerful but fundamentally limited algorithm, it will not be used for the betterment of mankind, it will be exploited by the few at the top a…

Correct! I’m glad people are finally starting to get it

weekends are always better on hn

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#72

Post by tim333 »

beginnings wrote: post #54

i tried to watch it but like AI in general, it was extraordinarily boring. neural nets are really cool technically, but the whole AI thing is just getting old and I couldnt care less where its going we can guarantee that whether its the birth of superintelligence or just a very powerful but fundamentally limited algorithm, it will not be used for the betterment of mankind, it will be exploited by the few at the top a…

If you watch on there's a bit where they decide to give away all the protein folding results for free when they could have charged (https://youtu.be/d95J8yzvjbQ?t=4497). Not everything is exploitation rather than the betterment of mankind.

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#73

Post by dwroberts »

ilaksh wrote: post #55
dwroberts wrote: post #36

I want to watch it, but at the same time, it’s basically going to be an advert for Google. I’m not sure if I can put up with the uncritical fluff. I would love to see a real (ie outsider) filmmaker do this - eg an updated ‘Lo and behold’ by Werner Herzog

It was directed by Greg Kohs, who is a real filmmaker and does not work for Google.

Yeah I don’t mean to say they’re not a real filmmaker or untalented etc, I mean more the context they’re doing it. That they’ve chosen to cover this topic themselves, and that they would show critical angles of it and not just promo + hagiography

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#74

Post by dekhn »

Rochus wrote: post #45
DrierCycle wrote: post #2

AlphaFold is optimization, not thinking. Propaganda 'r us.

Not sure why this is downvoted. The comment cuts to the core of the "Intelligence vs. Curve-Fitting" debate. From my humble perspective as a PhD in the molecular biology /biophysics field you are fundamentally correct: AlphaFold is optimization (curve-fitting), not thinking. But calling it "propaganda" might be a slight oversimplification of why that optimization is useful. If you ask AlphaFold to predict a protein t…

If there's one thing I wish DeepMind did less of, it's conflating the protein folding problem with static structure prediction. The former is a grand challenge problem that remains 'unsolved' while the latter is an impressive achievment that really is optimization using a huge collection of prior knowledge. I've told John Moult, the organizer of CASP this (I used to "compete" in these things), and I think most people know he's overstating the significance of static structure prediction.

Also, solving the protein folding problem (or getting to 100% accuracy on structure prediction) would not really move the needle in terms of curing diseases. These sorts of simplifications are great if you're trying to inspire students into a field of science, but get in the way when you are actually trying to rationally allocate a research budget for drug discovery.

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#75

Post by threethirtytwo »

QuantumGood wrote: post #48
threethirtytwo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are images and video a complete waste? This makes no sense to me. Right now the generators aren’t effective but they are definitely stepping stones to something better in the future. If that future thing produces video, movies and pictures better than anything humanity can produce at a rate faster than we can produce things… how is that a waste? It can arguably be bad for society but definitely not a waste.

Parent said "entertainment use cases" are a complete waste, not all uses of images and video. I don't agree, but do particularly find educational use cases of AI video are becoming compelling. I help people turn wire rolling shelf racks into the base of their home studio, and AI can now create a "how to attach something to a wire shelf rack" without me having to do all the space and rack and equipment and lighting an…

If AI can produce movies, video and art better aka “more entertaining” then humans than how is it a waste?

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#76

Post by threethirtytwo »

incognito124 wrote: post #30
threethirtytwo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are images and video a complete waste? This makes no sense to me. Right now the generators aren’t effective but they are definitely stepping stones to something better in the future. If that future thing produces video, movies and pictures better than anything humanity can produce at a rate faster than we can produce things… how is that a waste? It can arguably be bad for society but definitely not a waste.

Let me phrase it a bit differently, then: AI generated cats in Ghibli style are a waste, we should definitely do less of that. I did not hold that opinion before the documentary Education-style infographics and videos are OK.

I’m not even talking about this. Those cat videos are just stepping stones for academy award winning masterpieces of cinema like dune. All generated by AI on a click in one second.

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#77

Post by modeless »

walletdrainer wrote: post #62
awaythrow999 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. More accurate predictions for meta-data based killings which as championed by US in their war on terror

Metadata based killings are most likely a huge improvement from the prior state of affairs

Yeah. Let the leaders assassinate each other with drone strikes instead of indiscriminately bombing whole cities as they used to.

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#78

Post by [deleted] »

danielbln wrote: post #47
incognito124 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me phrase it a bit differently, then: AI generated cats in Ghibli style are a waste, we should definitely do less of that. I did not hold that opinion before the documentary Education-style infographics and videos are OK.

I'm glad you're not the sole arbiter for what is wasteful and what isn't.

[deleted]

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#79

Post by tim333 »

dekhn wrote: post #70
someguy101010 wrote: post #53

reposting this from youtube comment From 1:14:55-1:15:20, within the span of 25 seconds, the way Demis spoke about releasing all known sequences without a shred of doubt was so amazing to see. There wasn't a single second where he worried about the business side of it (profits, earnings, shareholders, investors) —he just knew it had to be open source for the betterment of the world. Gave me goosebumps. I watched that…

Another way to interpret this (and I don't mean it pejoratively at all): Demis has been optimizing his chances for winning a nobel prize for quite some time now. Releasing the data increased that chance. He also would have been fairly certain that the commercial value of the predictions was fairly low (simply predicting structures accurately was never the rate-limiting step for downstream things like drug discovery).…

Also since selling Deepmind to Google, it's Google's shareholder's money really.

Re: The Thinking Game Film – Google DeepMind documentary

#80

Post by tim333 »

Rochus wrote: post #45
DrierCycle wrote: post #2

AlphaFold is optimization, not thinking. Propaganda 'r us.

Not sure why this is downvoted. The comment cuts to the core of the "Intelligence vs. Curve-Fitting" debate. From my humble perspective as a PhD in the molecular biology /biophysics field you are fundamentally correct: AlphaFold is optimization (curve-fitting), not thinking. But calling it "propaganda" might be a slight oversimplification of why that optimization is useful. If you ask AlphaFold to predict a protein t…

I think if you watch the actual film you'd find they don't claim AlphaFold is thinking.
Post reply on HN