3 ms·

AI is not one thing at the moment. We have multiple systems that are being developed in parallel: • text generators • code generators • image generators • v

AI is not one thing at the moment. We have multiple systems that are being developed in parallel: • text generators • code generators • image generators • video generators • speech generators • sound/music generators • various robotics vision and control systems (often trained in virtual environments) • automated factories / warehouses / fulfillment centers • self-driving cars (trucks/planes/trains/boats/bikes/whatever) • scientific / reasoning / math AIs • military AIs I find all of these categories already have useful AIs. And they are getting better all the time. The progress might slow down here and there, but it keeps on going. Self-driving was pretty bad a year ago, and now we have Tesla FSD driving uninterrupted for multiple hours in complex city environments. Image generators now exceed 99.9% of humans in painting/drawing abilities. Text generators are decent. There are hallucination issues, and they are not creative at the best human level, but I'd say they write better than 90% of humans. When it comes to poetry/lyrics, they all still suck pretty badly. Video generators are in their infancy - we get decent quality, but absolutely mental imagery. Reasoning is the weakest point, in my opinion. Current gen models are just not good at reasoning. Sometimes they are brilliant, but then they make very silly mistakes that a 10-year old child wouldn't make. You just can't rely on their logical abilities. I have really high hopes for that area. If they can figure out reasoning, our science research will become a lot more reliable and a lot more fast.

asadotzler 2y ago
[flagged]
skydhash 2y ago
> Self-driving was pretty bad a year ago The threshold for acceptable self-driving is genuine effort from the automated system to avoid accidents as we can't punish it for bad driving. And I want auditable proof of that. > Image generators now exceed 99.9% of humans in painting/drawing abilities. I'm pretty sure the amount of people that can draw is less than that. And they can beat image generators by a mile as those generators are mostly doing automated matte painting. Yes copy-paste is faster than typing, but that's not write a novel. > Text generators are decent...but I'd say they write better than 90% of humans. Humans use language to communicate. And while there are bad communicators, I think lots of people are doing ok on that front. Text generators can be perfect syntax-wise, but the intent has to come from someone. And the produced text's quality is proportional to the amount of intent that it produces (that's why corporate language is so bland). > Video generators are in their infancy - we get decent quality, but absolutely mental imagery.* See Image Generator section, but in motion. > Reasoning is the weakest point, in my opinion... If they can figure out reasoning That's the 1-billion dollar question.
- bufferoverflow 2y ago
  > The threshold for acceptable self-driving is genuine effort from the automated system to avoid accidents as we can't punish it for bad driving. And I want auditable proof of that. You can have any standard of safety that you want, that's absolutely your choice. Plenty of automated systems that your life depends on that you have never audited and never will. That includes elevators, cars, planes, all kinds of medical gear, etc. My standard is simpler: whenever the AI is safer than the average human driver, it already saves lives. > I'm pretty sure the amount of people that can draw is less than that. You probably have some esoteric definition of "people that can draw". Anyone capable of holding a pen/pencil/brush can draw. > And while there are bad communicators, I think lots of people are doing ok on that front Look at the previous comment. Seems like you overestimated even your own communication skills :) > Text generators can be perfect syntax-wise, but the intent has to come from someone. I'm hoping that we will achieve the level of AI writing where you can prompt "write me an interesting sci-fi book", and it does. Not much intent here, much artificial intelligence required.

asadotzler 2y ago

[flagged]

skydhash 2y ago

> Self-driving was pretty bad a year ago The threshold for acceptable self-driving is genuine effort from the automated system to avoid accidents as we can't punish it for bad driving. And I want auditable proof of that. > Image generators now exceed 99.9% of humans in painting/drawing abilities. I'm pretty sure the amount of people that can draw is less than that. And they can beat image generators by a mile as those generators are mostly doing automated matte painting. Yes copy-paste is faster than typing, but that's not write a novel. > Text generators are decent...but I'd say they write better than 90% of humans. Humans use language to communicate. And while there are bad communicators, I think lots of people are doing ok on that front. Text generators can be perfect syntax-wise, but the intent has to come from someone. And the produced text's quality is proportional to the amount of intent that it produces (that's why corporate language is so bland). > Video generators are in their infancy - we get decent quality, but absolutely mental imagery.* See Image Generator section, but in motion. > Reasoning is the weakest point, in my opinion... If they can figure out reasoning That's the 1-billion dollar question.

bufferoverflow 2y ago
> The threshold for acceptable self-driving is genuine effort from the automated system to avoid accidents as we can't punish it for bad driving. And I want auditable proof of that. You can have any standard of safety that you want, that's absolutely your choice. Plenty of automated systems that your life depends on that you have never audited and never will. That includes elevators, cars, planes, all kinds of medical gear, etc. My standard is simpler: whenever the AI is safer than the average human driver, it already saves lives. > I'm pretty sure the amount of people that can draw is less than that. You probably have some esoteric definition of "people that can draw". Anyone capable of holding a pen/pencil/brush can draw. > And while there are bad communicators, I think lots of people are doing ok on that front Look at the previous comment. Seems like you overestimated even your own communication skills :) > Text generators can be perfect syntax-wise, but the intent has to come from someone. I'm hoping that we will achieve the level of AI writing where you can prompt "write me an interesting sci-fi book", and it does. Not much intent here, much artificial intelligence required.