5 ms·
As someone who remembers that time very well I disagree. Smartphones followed a similar path to the internet i.e. completely new paradigm, that had immediate b
by threeseed 2y ago
As someone who remembers that time very well I disagree.
Smartphones followed a similar path to the internet i.e. completely new paradigm, that had immediate benefit but needed technology to improve to become widely adopted. But where the roadmaps to improve these technologies were clear and well defined.
AI is far more akin to nuclear fusion where each step along the way will require major scientific breakthroughs. And where it's not clear how to get this grand AGI end-game. Especially as OpenAI has said advancements depend on compute capacity that we simply don't have.
[1] https://openai.com/index/learning-to-reason-with-llms/ https://openai.com/index/learning-to-reason-with-llms/
- bb88 2y agoI think it's more like nuclear fission, frankly. I don't think the major breakthroughs will be as difficult to achieve, but we'll have a trail of nasty side effects and bad actors that will be left in its wake. In 2020 I never thought an AI would code for me. And now it turns out, it's pretty good. But AI Slop is pretty much a toxic mess.
- CSMastermind 2y agoEven with their current capabilities, these AI systems will dramatically improve productivity. We could have a 20-year AI 'winter' with no new advancements, and they'd still be a big deal. The thing is that it will take years to integrate them into existing domains and workflows. Honestly I think the most relevant comparison is the rise of desktop computers themselves. Suddenly paper-based processes had to become electronic and in some cases that took 40 years.
- lm28469 2y ago> Even with their current capabilities, these AI systems will dramatically improve productivity It's been 24 months, where is it? And even what you can measure doesn't match the valuation of openai at all
- lifty 2y agoYou won’t necessarily notice it as much in end user application. But I already see good adoption for knowledge workers and the next step is in process automation through agentic workflows. Most likely the result will be in the form of efficiency gains, improved profits and worse customer service.
- apwell23 2y agowhy hasn't all the productivity boost reported in qtrly results from corporates.
- tbrownaw 2y ago> Suddenly paper-based processes had to become electronic and in some cases that took 40 years. "Took", past tense?
- threeseed 2y agoExcept we've had AI systems for a while now and it hasn't meaningfully impacted productivity across the economy. Maybe in select pockets e.g. knowledge workers and even then it's highly debatable. You compare this to the internet or smartphones and they have been transformative across every aspect of society. And as someone who works for a bank which is heavily exploring LLMs there is no complexity in integrating them into existing workflows. The issue is that (a) risk of privacy/security being compromised through prompt exploits and (b) risk of reputational damage if the prompt is biased or hallucinates. Issues that may well be inherent to all transformer based models.
- jncfhnb 2y agoSince you’re saying “for a while” I presume you mean ML. ML systems have had an enormous impact on productivity. There’s a huge volume of decisions that get made instantly and with far greater precision using models That were done manually before.
- pydry 2y agoI've worked with ML for a while and I wouldnt say that this is the case at all. ML also didnt replace manual decision making. A lot of previously automated decision making was done with what were basically encoded rules of thumb which didnt overfit much worse than "more advanced" ML models did.
- jncfhnb 2y agoYour personal failure to use ML successfully has no bearing on its wider deployment and success. Overfitting strongly implies that you or whoever was doing it just didn’t know what they were doing. ML is used everywhere.
- pydry 2y agoWow, salty :) How many ML projects for large businesses have you been on?
- tbrownaw 2y ago> AI is far more akin to nuclear fusion where each step along the way will require major scientific breakthroughs. And where it's not clear how to get this grand AGI end-game. We have AI now. We've had it for ages. We just stop using that term for things once we've gotten them working. We also already have artificial entities that are smarter and more capable than a lone human, and have for a long time. Bureaucracy and writing are incredibly powerful technologies, especially when combined.