4 ms·
> “AI” is just fancy speak for “complex math program” Not really? It's less about arithmetic and more about inferencing data in higher dimensions than we can u
by smoldesu 4y ago
> “AI” is just fancy speak for “complex math program”
Not really? It's less about arithmetic and more about inferencing data in higher dimensions than we can understand. Comparing it to traditional computation is a trap, same as treating it like a human mind. They've very different, under the surface.
IMO, if this is a data problem then we should treat it like one. Simple fix - find a legal basis for which licenses are permissive enough to allow for ML training, and train your models on that. The problem here isn't developers crying out in fear of being replaced by robots, it's more that the code that it is reproducing is not licensed for reproduction (and the AI doesn't know that). People who can prove that proprietary code made it into Copilot deserve a settlement. Schlubs like me who upload my dotfiles under BSD don't fall under the same umbrella, at least the way I see it.
- Cort3z 4y agoWho decides what constitutes an "AI program" vs just a "program"? What heuristic do we look at? At the end of the day, they have an equivalent of a .exe which runs, and outputs code that has a license attached to it.
- AnnasVirtual 4y agono, you clearly don't understand Neural Network, basically it's a file containing artificial neurons and their connections
- bobbruno 4y agoI can suggest an idea, considering that the “AI program” is the model, not the training algorithm. A program gets written by an entity (usually a person) and is executed to generate the desired output according to a deterministic mathematical function it expresses. A training algorithm is a program that gets written to train a model (the model being the “AI Program”) when presented to some training data inputs, to implement a function that is not the training algorithm function itself, but another one, generalising over a problem domain beyond just the original examples fed to the training algorithm. The output model is not the training algorithm or the training data (or an encoding of it) and exists as its own artefact, independent of both.
- heavyset_go 4y agoI've been saying AI is computational statistics on steroids for a while, and I think that's an apt generalization of what ML is.
- OJFord 4y agoThat oughtn't be controversial, in fact I wouldn't even bother with 'on steroids', implying it's a slightly different/morphed thing. The way I learnt it (very slightly, at university, not a particular focus) it was abundantly clear it was just stats.
- heavyset_go 4y agoI bring the steroids thing up because it's only relatively recently that we've had the massive computing power at our finger tips that we do now. We discovered the foundations of our current ML techniques a relatively long time ago, it's only been recently that we've been able to throw data centers full of powerful GPUs and whatnot at them.
- BenjiWiebe 4y agoIf it's just statistics, wouldn't that mean you wouldn't get verbatim output? i.e. you'd throw away all high frequency content?
- 2muchcoffeeman 4y agoBut it all runs on hardware we created and we know exactly what operations were implemented in that hardware. How is it not just math?
- AnnasVirtual 4y agoit is a math that simulate neurons firing
- 2muchcoffeeman 4y agoThat’s clearly not the case because if it were so simple we’d have an AGI now.
- kmeisthax 4y agoThe only license that is permissive enough for AI training is CC0. Art generators can't comply with attribution requirements and code generators don't know if and when they trip the GPL copyleft. I believe most permissive code licenses also have some kind of attribution requirement.
- urthor 4y ago> Not really? It's less about arithmetic and more about inferencing data in higher dimensions than we can understand. This is a VERY poor definition of mathematics.