2 ms·
Well i don't know the future, if it was a fad, this is how i would expect it to work out. Businesses start investing heavily in integrating into processes. Then
by bawolff 2y ago
Well i don't know the future, if it was a fad, this is how i would expect it to work out. Businesses start investing heavily in integrating into processes. Then the truth comes out - either it works, and that is great, or the businesses get burned. If they get burned then sentiment becomes negative and it becomes a past fad.
You're right its too early to know, but i think we are right on the cusp of finding out.
- bluGill 2y agoI think there is both fad and substance to AI. Some investments in AI are bad ideas that won't work out and so are a waste. However AI is still useful some some activities and those investments will change the business. In short like every other time some part of AI became the fad and went mainstream.
- danaris 2y agoPart of the problem is the hopelessly broad umbrella term "AI". Sure, ChatGPT is AI. StableDiffusion is AI. But... A computer-controlled Zergling in StarCraft: Brood War is AI. The OCR tools in your phone are AI. The imminent collision detection in your car is AI. Skynet is a (fictional) AI. Etc. This is a confusion being willfully fostered by companies like OpenAI (particularly the conflation of LLMs like ChatGPT with fictional "strong" AIs, or AGIs), and cavalierly ignored by the media, both tech-focused and mainstream media alike. Some of these subsets of AI are 100% successful products already out there today—or even 20 years ago! Some have interesting possibilities. Some are most likely fads. But as long as we're talking about them all with the same label, and not drawing explicit distinctions in discussions like this, we're going to continue to have people arguing past each other because one of them is talking about OCR and the other is talking about Skynet.