3 ms·

> What awesome human superpower do I have thanks to 'AI?' Ok, let's name a few: You can filter through 400 hours of video every minute (youtube's upload rate)

> What awesome human superpower do I have thanks to 'AI?' Ok, let's name a few: You can filter through 400 hours of video every minute (youtube's upload rate) and find, perhaps not THE most interesting videos to you, but at least videos interesting enough to watch a lot (Youtube). Those videos can be subtitled. Again not perfect (not that human translators of videos were -on average- very good) They can collect not just bucketloads, but absurd amounts of news and facts and write short summaries of what happened (ie. most of the newspaper articles you read these days) You can instruct machines to do things just by asking them (alexa, cortana, google). You can talk, over the phone, to thousands of people at once (using google cloud or amazon service, or you could hire a few machine learning engineers and give them a year to write stuff) You can "program" robots to walk, crawl, and twirl pencils without so much as knowing what a feedback loop is. You can generate infinite amounts (and lengths) of well-composed music. You can generate infinite amounts of beautiful paintings or even pictures (and even video, really) of whatever you want in whatever style you want. You can program a car to drive itself (getting a basic DNN algorithm up is not even that hard). You can have a drone fly itself through dense foliage and not hit stuff, and more generally many tricks with drone flying that no human, or human programmed non-learning algorithm can do (and yet we still insist on model-based autopilots) You can watch incredible amounts of timeseries and find things acting weird (very useful that one) ... https://www.reddit.com/r/machinelearning https://www.reddit.com/r/machinelearning Good luck doing any of the above by hand.

sheeshkebab 8y ago
I didn't think I needed any of these when I was I running around schools in 80s...also, most things above seem like those that we could collectively live without and be happier.
scottlocklin 8y ago
Let's list them Video filter: not AI, doesn't work as a video filter (aka searching youtube isn't actually searching video content), also nobody but NSA cares Video subtitle: granted; pretty cool on the rare occasion it works in a usable way News summaries: no, you can't do that Talking machines: HMM existed in useful form in the 80s Programming robots with 'AI' -no you absolutely cannot do this; anyone who tries to sell you this is a charlatan Generating 'well composed' music/art: total nonsense -name one such piece of music or art. FWIIW LZW also generates canned music, and isn't 'AI' Programming car to drive itself: no, you can't do this, despite the best efforts of Waymo's PR department to assert otherwise. Drone flight; collision avoidance tasks & etc: nope total nonsense "Watching timeseries:" this improves people's lives in what way? I'm aware of algorithms like SAX and so on; I'm also aware that moving average crossover is used a lot more often than ML based TS anomaly detection. You have a big fat nothing burger above. 'AI' hasn't changed anyone's life in an appreciable way. The things you list above are ... very far from the singularity of mass unemployment that people seem to envision. Most of them actually seem to create more jobs. Most of the things you cite above visibly do not exist in the physical world, outside of PR press releases. The only stuff which does work, basically all it does is increase the level of totalitarian surveillance possible.
- candiodari 8y ago
  > Video filter: not AI, doesn't work as a video filter (aka searching youtube isn't actually searching video content), also nobody but NSA cares This video seems to disagree: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzTbptEdKhY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzTbptEdKhY (youtube is not ONLY using video content, not even mostly, but it is using it) > Talking machines: HMM existed in useful form in the 80s HMMs are machine learning. Sure it's statistical learning, but come on. And I would further argue that wavenet is a hell of a lot better. > Programming robots with 'AI' -no you absolutely cannot do this; anyone who tries to sell you this is a charlatan Meaning it hasn't been productionized yet (and therefore it's very hard to do atm) yes. True. But it's also been shown to be possible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUZUr7jxoqM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUZUr7jxoqM etc ... > You have a big fat nothing burger above. 'AI' hasn't changed anyone's life in an appreciable way. I don't agree, obviously. > The things you list above are ... very far from the singularity of mass unemployment that people seem to envision. Most of them actually seem to create more jobs. I said exactly that didn't I ?
  - scottlocklin 8y ago
    A lot of things that people "show to be possible" really haven't been shown to be possible; autonomous vehicles being the most obvious elephant in the room. Your argument seems to be "we have gradient boosting and HMM and they are useful for things" which I certainly don't disagree with; I mostly make my living using such tools. What I do disagree with is the idea that it meaningfully increases human power over nature, or changes people's day to day lives. A list of things which meaningfully increased human power over nature: flight, radio, computers, networked computers, electrification, antibiotics, the microchip, nuclear power, the green revolution, steam engines; maybe even stuff like Pagerank/sparse SVD. The subject known as 'AI' seems to be down around ... I dunno, electric lawn mowers in its impact on human life. You can assert that the difference is gonna be real big one of these days; people made such assertions as far back as the 1960s, but so far, it totally hasn't made much of a difference. Yet your prediction, completely without any basis in the corporeal world, is that AI will eventually eliminate most jobs. Why do you think this?

sheeshkebab 8y ago

I didn't think I needed any of these when I was I running around schools in 80s...also, most things above seem like those that we could collectively live without and be happier.

scottlocklin 8y ago

Let's list them Video filter: not AI, doesn't work as a video filter (aka searching youtube isn't actually searching video content), also nobody but NSA cares Video subtitle: granted; pretty cool on the rare occasion it works in a usable way News summaries: no, you can't do that Talking machines: HMM existed in useful form in the 80s Programming robots with 'AI' -no you absolutely cannot do this; anyone who tries to sell you this is a charlatan Generating 'well composed' music/art: total nonsense -name one such piece of music or art. FWIIW LZW also generates canned music, and isn't 'AI' Programming car to drive itself: no, you can't do this, despite the best efforts of Waymo's PR department to assert otherwise. Drone flight; collision avoidance tasks & etc: nope total nonsense "Watching timeseries:" this improves people's lives in what way? I'm aware of algorithms like SAX and so on; I'm also aware that moving average crossover is used a lot more often than ML based TS anomaly detection. You have a big fat nothing burger above. 'AI' hasn't changed anyone's life in an appreciable way. The things you list above are ... very far from the singularity of mass unemployment that people seem to envision. Most of them actually seem to create more jobs. Most of the things you cite above visibly do not exist in the physical world, outside of PR press releases. The only stuff which does work, basically all it does is increase the level of totalitarian surveillance possible.

candiodari 8y ago
> Video filter: not AI, doesn't work as a video filter (aka searching youtube isn't actually searching video content), also nobody but NSA cares This video seems to disagree: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzTbptEdKhY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzTbptEdKhY (youtube is not ONLY using video content, not even mostly, but it is using it) > Talking machines: HMM existed in useful form in the 80s HMMs are machine learning. Sure it's statistical learning, but come on. And I would further argue that wavenet is a hell of a lot better. > Programming robots with 'AI' -no you absolutely cannot do this; anyone who tries to sell you this is a charlatan Meaning it hasn't been productionized yet (and therefore it's very hard to do atm) yes. True. But it's also been shown to be possible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUZUr7jxoqM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUZUr7jxoqM etc ... > You have a big fat nothing burger above. 'AI' hasn't changed anyone's life in an appreciable way. I don't agree, obviously. > The things you list above are ... very far from the singularity of mass unemployment that people seem to envision. Most of them actually seem to create more jobs. I said exactly that didn't I ?
- scottlocklin 8y ago
  A lot of things that people "show to be possible" really haven't been shown to be possible; autonomous vehicles being the most obvious elephant in the room. Your argument seems to be "we have gradient boosting and HMM and they are useful for things" which I certainly don't disagree with; I mostly make my living using such tools. What I do disagree with is the idea that it meaningfully increases human power over nature, or changes people's day to day lives. A list of things which meaningfully increased human power over nature: flight, radio, computers, networked computers, electrification, antibiotics, the microchip, nuclear power, the green revolution, steam engines; maybe even stuff like Pagerank/sparse SVD. The subject known as 'AI' seems to be down around ... I dunno, electric lawn mowers in its impact on human life. You can assert that the difference is gonna be real big one of these days; people made such assertions as far back as the 1960s, but so far, it totally hasn't made much of a difference. Yet your prediction, completely without any basis in the corporeal world, is that AI will eventually eliminate most jobs. Why do you think this?