3 ms·
As with everything in computing, what I want is more capability that runs on my own devices—my own compute servers, my workstation, my laptop, or my mobile devi
by bhauer 9y ago
As with everything in computing, what I want is more capability that runs on my own devices—my own compute servers, my workstation, my laptop, or my mobile device. Every application or service that has to interact with third-party servers ("the cloud") to provide its functionality is, to my mind, defective or at least deficient of the ideal.
AI is no exception. I have swarms of CPU cores in my life, the totality of which could easily accomplish all of the "AI" functions of any value that I've observed in my life and far more. Today's AI that works for me (rather than against me) provides things like voice recognition, calendar management, reminders, to-do list management, and route planning. None of these functions requires even a small fraction of my personal CPU core armada, which are idle for 99% of their clock cycles.
Today's all-too-popular refrain of leveraging the cloud to provide sufficient compute capacity for these tasks is disingenuous and is too often accepted as truth when it's just cover for data exfiltration.
- p1esk 9y agoWhat does this have to do with the "next big advance in AI"?
- TeMPOraL 9y agoEverything. But to rephrase GP's point in terms of the main question: the next big advance in AI they - and I - are looking for is AI being local, and not in the cloud.
- xaedes 9y agoI too am longing for local AI. That way the AIs I interact with can truly begin to learn. From me. For me. Not the same bot learned from all the aggregated Big Data for everyone. Personalized local AI. Also: Making AI local opens the doors for privacy protection once again, I hope... I want my bot to protect my data, not feed it to the big coorperations