Oh I totally agree with that, just the other day I was trying to think what products there are which I would pay for which would make me utilize AI in some capacity (and not just a simple algorithm). I couldn't find a single one. I use ChatGTP basically every day for small things, but if I had to pay for it, I don't think I would.
China’s AI overload: Baidu CEO warns of too many models, too few applications
Submitted 4 months ago by Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
jeena@piefed.jeena.net 4 months ago
Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Image/video upscaling via neural net is something I would pay for.
I currently use freeware/open source alternatives, but I am planning to get a copy of Topaz Video AI in the future.
Even the freeware/open source algorithms are incredible in terms of quality.
100@fedia.io 4 months ago
these chatbots are novelty toys at this point when stopping them from generating complete garbage isnt feasible with current methods
jeena@piefed.jeena.net 4 months ago
Yes exactly, today I used it to find the name of a dish which I ate in Poland when I was a child, I remembered what it was made of but not the name, only remembered a similar soup. But describing it the chat spat out the name so I will be making it during the next couple of days for dinner.
Bigos
Bigos
CosmoNova@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Seems to be a broken clock working twice a day scenario. It sounds convincing and I believe the general statement to be correct but they wouldn’t habe made this observation if their own AI efforts didn’t fall so short. They‘re seeing silicon valley raising massive amounts of money and become angsty.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 months ago
if their own AI efforts didn’t fall so short. They‘re seeing silicon valley raising massive amounts of money
Successful AI =/= grifting massive amounts of money
CosmoNova@lemmy.world 4 months ago
It is in the corporate space though. Wealth > rest.
ChowJeeBai@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Sokay, they’ll just steal the secrets to accelerate their programs as usual.
a4ng3l@lemmy.world 4 months ago
And forget the clamp in the process ?
_haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
I don’t want to live in a world without AI shoelaces (/s in case it’s needed)
AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 4 months ago
“i like your shoelaces”
“thanks i stole them from sam altman”
_haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
“It’s ok, he stole them too.”
alienanimals@lemmy.world 4 months ago
AI is so dumb. I’ve tried it and I can’t get it to do anything. There are no useful applications and it’s very bad!1!
pastermil@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
You may jest, but too many hammers and not enough nails is what led us here.
nikita@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
This feels like the dot com bubble all over again.
protoBelisarius@lemmy.world 4 months ago
I dont really think so. I mean yea, too much money gets dumped into AI, but the dot com comparison doesn’t really work. The dot com bubble burst because investors realized that a ton of small companies(aunt-emmas-flowers.com or something), had no strategies and unsustainable business models. They were all massively overvalued. But Microsoft, Google, Tencent, Baidu are all large companies, they aren’t comparable and unlikely to suffer much if one of their investment fail. Additionally, AI is incredibly young and essentially still in beta, just because it works and can be used (and be profited from) doesn’t mean the current versions are more than mometized research projects. Yes that’s a problem if these are sold as full products, but that’s want they are. All users are currently testers for the AI companies. A lot of companies managed to get some of that sweet VC but that’s always been possible with the hype of that time. Now its just AI, gullible Investors have lost money since the invention of investing.
frezik@midwest.social 4 months ago
Nvidia has a >$3T valuation, and that’s entirely based on feeding the AI bubble. Without it, they’re worth closer to what they were in 2022, which is about a tenth of what they are now.
gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
I get what you’re saying, but I still think the vast majority of AI use they’re trying to push nowadays is categorically pointless at best, and actively harmful and misleading at worst.
It’s because LLMs are logically incapable of mapping language to actual concepts (at least, in their current incarnation), which, in the vast majority of meaningful, complex, and nuanced knowledge domains, is going to yield subtle nonsense a meaningful proportion of the time, which is the most dangerously form of ML hallucination in the context of consumer/layperson usage. We have NOT done the work to deploy this technology safely and responsibly in modern society, but we’re deploying it anyways, and we’re deploying it at scale.
The bubble popping isn’t going to look like the .com bubble. It’s going to be a lot worse, because a lot more harm is being done - and will be done - but at the same time, there are also a LOT more HUGE companies and people with TONS of money who stand to lose CATASTROPHIC amounts of capital… and they’re all ignoring the fact that this tech is CLEARLY being used in harmful ways all over the place. And that’s without touching the energy consumption issue.
errer@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there are too many highly valued startups out there with an AI bent. The gain in stock value has been mostly the big boys. In the dot com era you had tons of hyped IPOs of companies whose stock valuations went to the moon. That doesn’t seem to be the case today.
RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 months ago
The major difference is that we don’t see an influx of insanely overvalued startups nobody heard of before.
That was the norm in the dotcom bubble and the reason nobody remembers the “major players” of that time now.
The AI boom is pushed by the well established big tech (which are also highly profitable - which dotcom startups were not).