5 ms·

Well, what about Deep Real-time Machine Learning at scale in the Cloud on Big Data powered by Blockchains™?

grosjona 8y ago
That actually sounds like a really good idea if it's possible. It would be a blockchain-based neural network which people can sell training data to (in exchange for the underlying cryptocurrency) and which other people can use via an API to do pattern recognition on their own user data (by paying in the same cryptocurrency). It would be a decentralized, autonomous AI.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  That sounda like an incredibly bad idea from incentives and exploitability alone. Machine learning on public data is bad enough /without/ paying people for it. At that point you'll get random garbage from a bot at best or deliberate attempts to turn your application as vulgar, violent, and racist as possible. Just look at the Twitch talking banana and the sheer level of effort to make it say racial slurs.
- dick_sucker2 8y ago
  The redditors in /r/machinelearning have shot this idea down many times. A few common arguments: 1) It costs more and isn't as performant as tuned machines. 2) The training data is very valuable and shouldn't be shared on a blockchain and restricted to a closed network. Maybe there is one advantage though. Crypto people have bought up all the GPU's.
  - grosjona 8y ago
    1) There are many possible implementations. Right now the problem is that very few software engineers understand blockchain sufficiently so that they can design efficient solutions. There is always an overhead when coupling a service to a blockchain but it can be minimal if done correctly. 2) People get paid to provide quality training data... So yeah it's valuable but if there is a built-in financial incentive to share data with the system then people will do it. Also, other people could get paid to verify/curate the training data. The system just needs to setup the right incentives.
    - dick_sucker2 8y ago
      Why would Tesla share valuable training data with Ford?
baxtr 8y ago
Didn’t you to forget to include IoT?
- IshKebab 8y ago
  Nah IoT is so 2017.
  - mr__y 8y ago
    Are you trying to say that my startup that creates deep learning solutions in blokchain for internet of self-driving things might not be successful?
    - TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
      Not unless your parents donated millions to Stanford.
  - princekolt 8y ago
    IoT is definitely going to be a thing, but only after the market realizes that connecting your light bulb to the internet so that you can turn it on and off from the Bahamas makes zero fucking sense.
oceanman888 8y ago
And to a non-tech this basically translate to "Super Cowboy USA Hot Dog Rocket Ship American Number One"... As I grew older I start to feel that tech community have the responsibility to stop everything from turning into marketing buzzwords.

That actually sounds like a really good idea if it's possible. It would be a blockchain-based neural network which people can sell training data to (in exchange for the underlying cryptocurrency) and which other people can use via an API to do pattern recognition on their own user data (by paying in the same cryptocurrency). It would be a decentralized, autonomous AI.

Nasrudith 8y ago
That sounda like an incredibly bad idea from incentives and exploitability alone. Machine learning on public data is bad enough /without/ paying people for it. At that point you'll get random garbage from a bot at best or deliberate attempts to turn your application as vulgar, violent, and racist as possible. Just look at the Twitch talking banana and the sheer level of effort to make it say racial slurs.
dick_sucker2 8y ago
The redditors in /r/machinelearning have shot this idea down many times. A few common arguments: 1) It costs more and isn't as performant as tuned machines. 2) The training data is very valuable and shouldn't be shared on a blockchain and restricted to a closed network. Maybe there is one advantage though. Crypto people have bought up all the GPU's.
- grosjona 8y ago
  1) There are many possible implementations. Right now the problem is that very few software engineers understand blockchain sufficiently so that they can design efficient solutions. There is always an overhead when coupling a service to a blockchain but it can be minimal if done correctly. 2) People get paid to provide quality training data... So yeah it's valuable but if there is a built-in financial incentive to share data with the system then people will do it. Also, other people could get paid to verify/curate the training data. The system just needs to setup the right incentives.
  - dick_sucker2 8y ago
    Why would Tesla share valuable training data with Ford?

baxtr 8y ago

Didn’t you to forget to include IoT?

IshKebab 8y ago
Nah IoT is so 2017.
- mr__y 8y ago
  Are you trying to say that my startup that creates deep learning solutions in blokchain for internet of self-driving things might not be successful?
  - TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
    Not unless your parents donated millions to Stanford.
- princekolt 8y ago
  IoT is definitely going to be a thing, but only after the market realizes that connecting your light bulb to the internet so that you can turn it on and off from the Bahamas makes zero fucking sense.

oceanman888 8y ago

And to a non-tech this basically translate to "Super Cowboy USA Hot Dog Rocket Ship American Number One"... As I grew older I start to feel that tech community have the responsibility to stop everything from turning into marketing buzzwords.