It’s the new “4k”. Just buzzwords to get clicks.
Comment on Court Bans Use of 'AI-Enhanced' Video Evidence Because That's Not How AI Works
guyrocket@kbin.social 5 months ago
I think we need to STOP calling it "Artificial Intelligence". IMHO that is a VERY misleading name. I do not consider guided pattern recognition to be intelligence.
UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world 5 months ago
lemann@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 months ago
My disappointment when I realised “4k” was only 2160p 😔
boeman@lemmy.world 5 months ago
I can’t disagree with this… After basing the size off of the vertical pixel count, we’re now going to switch to the horizontal count to describe the resolution.
exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de 5 months ago
on the contrary! it’s a very old buzzword!
AI should be called machine learning. much better. If i had my way from here on it would be called “fancy curve fitting” from here on.
Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Technically speaking AI is any effort on the part of machines to mimic living things. So computer vision for instance. This is distinct from ML and Deep Learning which use historical statistical data to train on and then forecast or simulate.
exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de 5 months ago
“machines mimicking living things” does not mean exclusively AI. Many scientific fields are trying to mimic living things.
AI is a very hazy concept imho as it’s difficult to even define when a system is intelligent - or when a human is.
Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 5 months ago
Optical Character Recognition used to be firmly in the realm of AI until it became so common that even the post office users it. Nowadays, OCR is so common that instead of being proper AI, it’s just another mundane application of a neural network. I guess, eventually Large Language Models will be outside there scope of AI.
ricdeh@lemmy.world 5 months ago
You, and humans in general, are also just sophisticated pattern recognition and matching machines. If neural networks are not intelligent, then you are not intelligent.
buddascrayon@lemmy.world 5 months ago
This may be the dumbest statement I have yet seen on this platform. That’s like equating a virus with a human by saying both things replicate themselves so they must be similar.
Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works 5 months ago
You can say what you like but absolutely zero true and full understand of what human intelligence actually is or how it works.
“AI”, or whatever you want to call it, is not at all similar.
Gabu@lemmy.world 5 months ago
I do not consider guided pattern recognition to be intelligence.
That’s a you problem, this debate happened 50 years ago and we decided Intelligence is the right word.
NaoPb@eviltoast.org 5 months ago
You forget that we can change these definitions any time we see fit.
Gabu@lemmy.world 5 months ago
We could… if it made any sense to do so, which it doesn’t.
ricdeh@lemmy.world 5 months ago
You cannot, because you are not a scientist and judging from your statements, you do not know what you’re talking about.
guyrocket@kbin.social 5 months ago
NaoPb@eviltoast.org 5 months ago
It seems you are sadly stuck in your own thought patterns.
It does not take a scientist to change things. It takes a society to change definitions.
Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 5 months ago
What is the definition of intelligence? Does it require sentience? Can a data set be intelligently compiled into interesting results without human interaction? Yes the term AI is stretched a bit thin but I believe it has enough substance to qualify.
rdri@lemmy.world 5 months ago
How is guided pattern recognition is different from imagination (and therefore intelligence) though?
Natanael@slrpnk.net 5 months ago
There’s a lot of other layers in brains that’s missing in machine learning. These models don’t form world models and some have an understanding of facts and have no means of ensuring consistency, to start with.
rdri@lemmy.world 5 months ago
I mean if we consider just the reconstruction process used in digital photos it feels like current ai models are already very accurate and won’t be improved by much even if we made them closer to real “intelligence”.
The point is that reconstruction itself can’t produce missing details, not that a “properly intelligent” mind will be any better at it than current ai.
lightstream@lemmy.ml 5 months ago
They absolutely do contain a model of the universe which their answers must conform to. When an LLM hallucinates, it is creating a new answer which fits its internal model.
Natanael@slrpnk.net 5 months ago
Statistical associations is not equivalent to a world model, especially because they’re neither deterministic nor even tries to prevent giving up conflicting answers. It models only use of language
Jesus_666@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Your comment is a good reason why these tools have no place in the courtroom: The things you describe as imagination.
They’re image generation tools that will generate a new, unrelated image that happens to look similar to the source image. They don’t reconstruct anything and they have no understanding of what the image contains. All they know is which color the pixels in the output might probably have given the pixels in the input.
It’s no different from giving a description of a scene to an author, asking them to come up with any event that might have happened in such a location and then trying to use the resulting short story to convict someone.
rdri@lemmy.world 5 months ago
They don’t reconstruct anything and they have no understanding of what the image contains.
With enough training they, in fact, will have some understanding. But that still leaves us with that “enhance meme” problem aka the limited resolution of the original data. There are no means to discover what exactly was hidden between visible pixels, only approximate. So yes you are correct, just described it a bit differently.
lightstream@lemmy.ml 5 months ago
they, in fact, will have some understanding
These models have spontaneously acquired a concept of things like perspective, scale and lighting, which you can argue is already an understanding of 3D space.
What they do not have (and IMO won’t ever have) is consciousness. The fact we have created machines that have understanding of the universe without consciousness is very interesting to me. It’s very illuminating on the subject of what consciousness is, by providing a new example of what it is not.
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 5 months ago
I agree. It’s restricted intelligence (RI), at best, and even that can be argued against.
postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 5 months ago
My Concious Cognative Correlator is the real shit.
TurtleJoe@lemmy.world 5 months ago
A term created in order to vacuum up VC funding for spurious use cases.