• jarfil@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    5 months ago

    AI has been overhyped since it first played tic-tac-toe in the 1950s. One definition of “AI” is: “an algorithm that people don’t understand… yet” 🤷

    • Letstakealook@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      5 months ago

      The stuff they’re calling ai now is just predictive text algorithms. I really can’t wait to stop hearing about this because it is all artificial with no intelligence.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        You know it’s funny how many times I’ve heard that “it’s just predictive text algorithms!” As a dismissal that I’m beginning to think we’re just predictive text algorithms.

        • Blóðbók@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          We are prediction machines, but nothing like chatgpt. Current AI has no ability to learn, adapt, or even consider the future.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Current AI has no ability to learn, adapt, or even consider the future.

            BS. The first two are all a neural net does.

            • Blóðbók@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              Once. They do not have the ability to learn or adapt on their own. They are created by humans through “deep learning”, but that is fundamentally different from continuously learning based on one’s own actions and experiences.

              • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Yeah, once they’re out of training, that’s true. It’s almost like we grow this semi-intelligence, and then run it in something like a deep coma.

                I wouldn’t quite say it’s a one-time thing, though. It’s not only possible but typical to put it back in training to finetune it.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yep. All the reasons cited could pretty much apply to a person as well. GPT-4 is pretty damn smart by every reasonable measure.

      • tyler@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        LLMs have been shown to have emergent math capabilities (that are the opposite of what is trained) so you’re simplifying way too much. Yes a lot is just “predictive text” but there’s a ton of “this was not the training and we don’t know how it knows this” as well.

        • anachronist@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          5 months ago

          Game of Life has cool emergent properties that are a lot more interesting and fun to play with than LLMs. LLMs also have emergent properties like, for instance, failing classification due to the manipulation of individual image pixels.

      • jarfil@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Not exactly.

        LLMs are predictive-associative token algorithms with a degree of randomness and some self-reflection. A key aspect is that anything can be a token, they can self-feed their own output, creating the basis for a thought cycle, as well as output control input for other algorithms. It remains to be seen whether the core of “(human) intelligence” is much more than that, and by how much.

        Stable Diffusion is a random image generator that refines its output based on perceptual traits associated with a prompt. It’s like a “lite” version of human dreaming, only with a super-human training set. Kind of an “uncanny valley” version of dreaming.

        It just so happens that both algorithms have been showcased at about the same time, and it’s the first time we can build a “set and forget” AI system that can both make decisions about its own next steps, and emulate human creativity… which has driven the hype into overdrive.

        I don’t think we’ll stop hearing about it, but I do think there is much more to be done, and it’s pretty much impossible to feed any of the algorithms with human experience data, without registering at least one human learning cycle, as in over many years from inside a humanoid robot.