5 ms·

I think we'll find that that asymptote only holds for cases where the end user is not really an active participant in creating the next model: - take your data

I think we'll find that that asymptote only holds for cases where the end user is not really an active participant in creating the next model: - take your data - make a model - sell it back to you Eventually all of the available data will have been squeezed for all it's worth the only way to differentiate oneself as an AI company will be to propel your users to new heights so that there's new stuff to learn. That growth will be slower, but I think it'll bear more meaningful fruit. I'm not sure if today's investors are patient enough to see us through to that phase in any kind of a controlled manner, so I expect a bumpy ride in the interim.

conartist6 10mo ago
Yeah except that models don't propel communities towards new heights. They drive towards the averages. They take from the best to give to the worst, so that as much value is destroyed as created. There's no virtuous cycle there...
- __MatrixMan__ 10mo ago
  Is that constraint fundamental to what they are? Or are they just reflecting the behavior of markets when there's low hanging fruit around? When you look at models that were built for a specific purpose, closely intertwined with experts who care about that purpose, they absolutely propel communities to new heights. Consider the impact of alphafold, it won a Nobel prize, proteomics is forever changed. The issue is that that's not currently the business model that's aimed at most of us. We have to have a race to the bottom first. We can have nice things later, if we're lucky, once a certain sort of investor goes broke and a different sort takes the helm. It's stupid, but its a stupidity that predates AI by a long shot.
  - conartist6 10mo ago
    Experts making a specialized model isn't an example of an AI contributing value to society. All the value a model can offer comes from one of exactly two places: the person building the model, or the people the model trained on. We know that the model training on the model training on the model leads to model collapse...
    - __MatrixMan__ 10mo ago
      Your word choice implies a very zero-sum perspective on value. Value is determined by what we value, it's a choice. If a bunch of scientists value good approximations for how a protein will fold, and then a model generates more such things in a year than those scientists could make in a century, that's a lot of value. Not extracted from anyone, created.
      - conartist6 10mo ago
        Yes. Value created by the people who made the data the model trained on, and the people who ensured that the training created a good model. I'm just saying it's not magic, just another kind of high-level work that people do.
  - snigsnog 10mo ago
    I don't know anything about the field but apparently AlphaFold having "solved the problem of protein folding" is overhyped? https://old.reddit.com/r/bioinformatics/comments/1e0s55e/did_the_deep_learning_algorithm_alphaford_2/lcp14cm/ https://old.reddit.com/r/bioinformatics/comments/1e0s55e/did...

conartist6 10mo ago

Yeah except that models don't propel communities towards new heights. They drive towards the averages. They take from the best to give to the worst, so that as much value is destroyed as created. There's no virtuous cycle there...

__MatrixMan__ 10mo ago
Is that constraint fundamental to what they are? Or are they just reflecting the behavior of markets when there's low hanging fruit around? When you look at models that were built for a specific purpose, closely intertwined with experts who care about that purpose, they absolutely propel communities to new heights. Consider the impact of alphafold, it won a Nobel prize, proteomics is forever changed. The issue is that that's not currently the business model that's aimed at most of us. We have to have a race to the bottom first. We can have nice things later, if we're lucky, once a certain sort of investor goes broke and a different sort takes the helm. It's stupid, but its a stupidity that predates AI by a long shot.
- conartist6 10mo ago
  Experts making a specialized model isn't an example of an AI contributing value to society. All the value a model can offer comes from one of exactly two places: the person building the model, or the people the model trained on. We know that the model training on the model training on the model leads to model collapse...
  - __MatrixMan__ 10mo ago
    Your word choice implies a very zero-sum perspective on value. Value is determined by what we value, it's a choice. If a bunch of scientists value good approximations for how a protein will fold, and then a model generates more such things in a year than those scientists could make in a century, that's a lot of value. Not extracted from anyone, created.
    - conartist6 10mo ago
      Yes. Value created by the people who made the data the model trained on, and the people who ensured that the training created a good model. I'm just saying it's not magic, just another kind of high-level work that people do.
- snigsnog 10mo ago
  I don't know anything about the field but apparently AlphaFold having "solved the problem of protein folding" is overhyped? https://old.reddit.com/r/bioinformatics/comments/1e0s55e/did_the_deep_learning_algorithm_alphaford_2/lcp14cm/ https://old.reddit.com/r/bioinformatics/comments/1e0s55e/did...