4 ms·

This article matches a lot of my thoughts on this topic too. There is a huge hype wave that will soon crash (alas), and it will take down a lot with it...

vtange 9y ago
Any keyword that is depended on to move money will see hype waves, surfs and crashes. We are seeing/saw it with crypto, it is no different with AI.
- dmreedy 9y ago
  While I agree the general thrust of what you're saying, I do think there is something subtly different about the AI hype cycle. It's so accessible. The core concepts are the fundamental, inextricable frame of daily experience. The metaphors we use to talk about it borrow so heavily from lay terminology that it's so easy, so automatic, to believe we understand the state of modern AI because we understand the common definitions of the words that tend to show up around the matter. Do some semantic arithmetic and sum up a few words like 'training' and 'learning' and 'intelligence' and all of the sudden, we're all walking around with what we think are proximate models of what everyone else is talking about to, or y'know close enough to make a consulting business out of. The real kicker though, is that at it's heart we're all pretty convinced that we understand what it's like to be intelligent. I mean how could we not be? Nevermind the agonies of ten thousand years of philosophers and clergy. And so it must be pretty straightforward, with a little bit of introspection, a crash course in statistics, and maybe a TED talk or two, to map that to the artificial side too, right?
wvenable 9y ago
I disagree. Practically all breakthroughs in computing science were always 30 years old when they finally became common and useful parts of everyday society. If the breakthrough of modern AI is just as old and we're just now seeing it implemented everywhere, that's not a sign of a crash.
- moxious 9y ago
  What do you see as the basic design of modern AI? The 30 year old discipline of symbolic AI doesn't have much to do with today's statistical AI.
  - wvenable 9y ago
    I'm just taking the article on face value; from the very first line: "Just about every AI advance you’ve heard of depends on a breakthrough that’s three decades old."
  - zardo 9y ago
    Symbolic AI is closer to 60 years old. Many of the fundamental concepts of the current wave are 30 years old.
  - fjsolwmv 9y ago
    Symbolic AI and statistical AI are both over 50 years old. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptron https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptron Statical AI was delayed in practice because it was far more expensive than symbolic AI.
- mannykannot 9y ago
  I think the issue is whether there is anything else in the pipeline - though it's hard to tell until it comes out of the pipe, so to speak. Back-propagation revived neural networks for a while, but wasn't there a period between then and now when they were thought to have almost exhausted their potential?
remind_me_again 9y ago
I don't think so as long as there are practical results.

vtange 9y ago

Any keyword that is depended on to move money will see hype waves, surfs and crashes. We are seeing/saw it with crypto, it is no different with AI.

dmreedy 9y ago
While I agree the general thrust of what you're saying, I do think there is something subtly different about the AI hype cycle. It's so accessible. The core concepts are the fundamental, inextricable frame of daily experience. The metaphors we use to talk about it borrow so heavily from lay terminology that it's so easy, so automatic, to believe we understand the state of modern AI because we understand the common definitions of the words that tend to show up around the matter. Do some semantic arithmetic and sum up a few words like 'training' and 'learning' and 'intelligence' and all of the sudden, we're all walking around with what we think are proximate models of what everyone else is talking about to, or y'know close enough to make a consulting business out of. The real kicker though, is that at it's heart we're all pretty convinced that we understand what it's like to be intelligent. I mean how could we not be? Nevermind the agonies of ten thousand years of philosophers and clergy. And so it must be pretty straightforward, with a little bit of introspection, a crash course in statistics, and maybe a TED talk or two, to map that to the artificial side too, right?

wvenable 9y ago

I disagree. Practically all breakthroughs in computing science were always 30 years old when they finally became common and useful parts of everyday society. If the breakthrough of modern AI is just as old and we're just now seeing it implemented everywhere, that's not a sign of a crash.

moxious 9y ago
What do you see as the basic design of modern AI? The 30 year old discipline of symbolic AI doesn't have much to do with today's statistical AI.
- wvenable 9y ago
  I'm just taking the article on face value; from the very first line: "Just about every AI advance you’ve heard of depends on a breakthrough that’s three decades old."
- zardo 9y ago
  Symbolic AI is closer to 60 years old. Many of the fundamental concepts of the current wave are 30 years old.
- fjsolwmv 9y ago
  Symbolic AI and statistical AI are both over 50 years old. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptron https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptron Statical AI was delayed in practice because it was far more expensive than symbolic AI.
mannykannot 9y ago
I think the issue is whether there is anything else in the pipeline - though it's hard to tell until it comes out of the pipe, so to speak. Back-propagation revived neural networks for a while, but wasn't there a period between then and now when they were thought to have almost exhausted their potential?

remind_me_again 9y ago

I don't think so as long as there are practical results.