3 ms·

As far as I know, do humans perceive the rotating snakes illusion because our eyes quickly jump around (saccade). Stare at one point and it stops rotating. I sk

As far as I know, do humans perceive the rotating snakes illusion because our eyes quickly jump around (saccade). Stare at one point and it stops rotating. I skimmed the publication, but the word saccade is not in it. I feel with this AI hype, we are desperate to find human like traits in these systems.

xxs 8y ago
I wonder how far we are from the next AI winter. AIs have touted with any task to upmost hype Nvidia GPUs come to mind - help enhance MRI or invent pixels upscaling games. Trying to sell neural networks as the next magic incarnation seems to be the default route of many marketing departments.
- antpls 8y ago
  I'm rather young (25-30), so I didn't get to know the first "AI winter", but to me there is still potential for improvement of neural networks. Both hardware (new DSP cores) and theories related to NN (transfer learning, layers architectures) can be improved, and also new business applications who are not yet developed because of the impact on people's jobs. We didn't reach the full potential of neural networks, IMHO. Wait before we start connecting 100's of today's neural networks together and see what happen. On a bigger scale of time, we could say the "AI winter" actually never existed, as all those last decades were dedicated to developing the hardwares and concepts we needed for today's algorithms. It was a long iteration of the loop 'hardware <-> algorithms <-> applications <-> new hardware needs' "AI", as I imagine it, is not a product someone can sell. It's not tangible, it's hardly measurable, it's not only one technology, it's more a philosophical concept too me. Edit : As for example, there is right now a link titled "Generating custom photo-realistic faces using AI" on the front page. It's misnamed, as an actual "AI" would probably not let itself be "used". The title would be better named "Generating custom photo-realistic faces using Neural Networks" (or "Deep Learning", or "Machine Learning")
  - gambler 8y ago
    >We didn't reach the full potential of neural networks We didn't reach the full potential of random forests or rule-based systems either. That's the problem with AI "seasons" and hype. Research being driven by things that have little to do with its subject.
candiodari 8y ago
I think the reason humans see movement is actually CNNs. We don't actually detect movement with our eyes, just like a still camera doesn't. We just "convolve" a few frames over time. And if an image shifts + the 16 pixels or so under consideration "look like" something that ought to move, guess what, the movement signal goes beep. Which is presumably why our optical sensing system goes to such great lengths to keep the image on our eyes stationary.
SilasX 8y ago
Relatedly (I think), the snakes stop moving if you stare at it with that zoned-out, glazed-over, I'm-not-listening look. (At least for me.)

xxs 8y ago

I wonder how far we are from the next AI winter. AIs have touted with any task to upmost hype Nvidia GPUs come to mind - help enhance MRI or invent pixels upscaling games. Trying to sell neural networks as the next magic incarnation seems to be the default route of many marketing departments.

antpls 8y ago
I'm rather young (25-30), so I didn't get to know the first "AI winter", but to me there is still potential for improvement of neural networks. Both hardware (new DSP cores) and theories related to NN (transfer learning, layers architectures) can be improved, and also new business applications who are not yet developed because of the impact on people's jobs. We didn't reach the full potential of neural networks, IMHO. Wait before we start connecting 100's of today's neural networks together and see what happen. On a bigger scale of time, we could say the "AI winter" actually never existed, as all those last decades were dedicated to developing the hardwares and concepts we needed for today's algorithms. It was a long iteration of the loop 'hardware <-> algorithms <-> applications <-> new hardware needs' "AI", as I imagine it, is not a product someone can sell. It's not tangible, it's hardly measurable, it's not only one technology, it's more a philosophical concept too me. Edit : As for example, there is right now a link titled "Generating custom photo-realistic faces using AI" on the front page. It's misnamed, as an actual "AI" would probably not let itself be "used". The title would be better named "Generating custom photo-realistic faces using Neural Networks" (or "Deep Learning", or "Machine Learning")
- gambler 8y ago
  >We didn't reach the full potential of neural networks We didn't reach the full potential of random forests or rule-based systems either. That's the problem with AI "seasons" and hype. Research being driven by things that have little to do with its subject.

candiodari 8y ago

I think the reason humans see movement is actually CNNs. We don't actually detect movement with our eyes, just like a still camera doesn't. We just "convolve" a few frames over time. And if an image shifts + the 16 pixels or so under consideration "look like" something that ought to move, guess what, the movement signal goes beep. Which is presumably why our optical sensing system goes to such great lengths to keep the image on our eyes stationary.

SilasX 8y ago

Relatedly (I think), the snakes stop moving if you stare at it with that zoned-out, glazed-over, I'm-not-listening look. (At least for me.)