2 ms·
> Those algos just have to keep up with chatGPT the same way they've already been keeping up with spam, the 95% of the web that is a dumpster fire, etc. That "
by munificent 4y ago
> Those algos just have to keep up with chatGPT the same way they've already been keeping up with spam, the 95% of the web that is a dumpster fire, etc.
That "just" is an arms race so fantastically difficult that the current leading business doing it has a market cap of $1.4 trillion.
Those algos are, to date, some of the world's most sophisticated uses of AI.
This is like observing that the howitzer was just invented and saying, "Don't worry, we've got chainmail armor."
- qup 4y agoI don't think that's a keen analogy at all. We don't currently have chainmail. s/Google search/gmail spam filtering/youtube suggested algorithm is a dike holding back an ocean of shit. I'm not sure how to make an armor analogy, so let's just say it's really good armor. Also assuming you meant 1.4T=Alphabet, I cannot go along with your pretending that the 1.4 trillion dollar cap is a function of PageRank, nor can I pretend that it's remotely related to whether they can continue providing good results post-chatGPT. Why don't you think they can handle it?
- munificent 4y agoI certainly hope they can handle it. But it looks to me that generative AI is posed to give a huge new weapon to bad actors and I absolutely think that's a bad thing, regardless of whether the good actors are somehow able to defend themselves from it.