Nobel Prize 2024

Comments

• daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The whole “all AI bad” is disconnected and primitivism.

  John J. Hopfield work is SCIENCE with caps. A decade of investigations during the 80s when computational power couldn’t really do much with their models. And now it has been shown that those models work really good given proper computational power.

  Also not all AI is generative AI that takes money out of fanfic drawers pockets or an useless hallucinating chatbot. Neural networks are commonly used in science as a very useful tool for many tasks. Algo image recognition is nowadays practically a solved issue thanks to their research. Proteins folding. Dataset reduction. Fluent text to speech. Speech recognition… AI may be getting more track nowadays because the generative AIs (that also have their own merit, like or not) but there is much more to it.

  As any technological advance there are shitty use cases and good use cases. You cannot condemn a whole tech just for the shitty uses of some greedy capitalists. Well… you can condemn it. But then I will classify you as a primitivist.

  Scientific theory that resulted in practical applications useful to people is why the nobel prize was created to begin with. So it is a well given prize. More so than many others.

  source

  • homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Agreed. Which is why we should call it Machine Learning (or Data Science) and continue to torch OpenAI until it is no more.

    source
  • msage@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    ‘AI hate’ is usually connected with insane claims like ‘we have “reasoning” model’.

    That shit needs to die in fire.

    I’m still waiting for the full-planet weather model. That will be something.

    source

    • Revan343@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I’m still waiting for the full-planet weather model. That will be something.

      That’s going to be a hard one, given that past weather patterns are increasingly not predictive of future weather patterns, because something keeps dumping CO2 into the atmosphere and raising the global temperature

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Furbag@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Generative AI is really causing a negative association with AI in general to the point where a proper rebranding is probably in order.

    source

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Generative AI is part to AI. And it has its own merits. Very big merits. Like or not it is a milestone on the field. That it is mostly hated not because it doesn’t work but because it does.

      source
    • Don_alForno@feddit.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Let’s start by not calling it AI anymore. Cause it isn’t.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Tja@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    You sir or madam give me hope that there are still reasonable people on the internet. Well written.

    Wait, are you an AI bot defending itself…?

    source

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Luckily genAI isn’t good enough to sound this real yet… I hope

      source
  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Oh, sure, Mr. Enshittifist, you can call me that.

    source
• selokichtli@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Today I learned about AI agents in the news and I just can think: Jesus. The example shown was of an AI agent using voice synthesis to bargain against a human agent about the fee for a night in some random hotel. In the news, the commenter talked about how the people could use this agents to get rid of annoying, reiterative, unwanted phone calls. Then I remembered about that night my in-laws were tricked to give their car away to robbers because they thought my sister in law was kidnapped, all through a phone call.

  Yeah, AI agents will free us all from invasive megacorporations. /s

  source
• BleatingZombie@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Why isn’t anyone saying that AI and machine learning are (currently) the same thing? There’s no such thing as “Artificial Intelligence” (yet)

  source

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Its more like intelligience is very poorly defined so a less controversial statement is thar General Artificial Intelligience doesn’t exist.

    Also Generative AI such as LLMs are very very far from it, and machine learning in general haven’t yielded much result in the persuit of sophonce and sapience.

    Although they technically can pass a turing test as long as the turing test has a very short time limit.

    source
  • KingRandomGuy@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I work in an ML-adjacent field (CV) and I thought I’d add that AI and ML aren’t quite the same thing. You can have non-learning based methods that fall under the field of AI - for instance, tree search methods can be pretty effective algorithms to define an agent for relatively simple games like checkers, and they don’t require any learning whatsoever.

    Normally, we say Deep Learning (the subfield of ML that relates to deep neural networks, including LLMs) is a subset of Machine Learning, which in turn is a subset of AI.

    Like others have mentioned, AI is just a poorly defined term unfortunately, largely because intelligence isn’t a well defined term either. In my undergrad we defined an AI system as a programmed system that has the capacity to do tasks that are considered to require intelligence. Obviously, this definition gets flaky since not everyone agrees on what tasks would be considered to require intelligence. This also has the problem where when the field solves a problem, people (including those in the field) tend to think “well, if we could solve it, surely it couldn’t have really required intelligence” and then move the goal posts. We’ve seen that already with games like Chess and Go, as well as CV tasks like image recognition and object detection at super-human accuracy.

    source
  • nialv7@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    that heavily depends on how you define “intelligence”. if you insist on “think, reason and behave like a human”, then no, we don’t have “Artificial Intelligence” yet. on the other hand if you consider the ability to play chess or go intelligence, the answer is different.

    source

    • minyakcurry@monyet.cc ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Honestly I would consider BFS/DFS artificial intelligence (and I think most introductory AI courses agree). But yea it’s a definition game and I don’t think most people qualify intelligence as purely human-centric. Simple tasks like pattern recognition already count as a facet of intelligence.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • TriflingToad@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It very much depends on what you consider AI, or even what you consider intelligence. I personally consider LLMs AI because it’s artificial.

    source
  • uis@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    currently

    There is also ancient thing called expert system

    source
• IsoSpandy@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I don’t get the ai hate sentiment. In fact I want ai to be so good that it steals all our jobs. Every single “worker” on the planet. The only job I don’t think they can steal is that of middle management because I don’t think we have digitized data on how to suck your own dick. After everybody is jobless, then we would be free. We won’t need the rich. They can be made into a fine broth.

  Sarcasm aside, I really believe we should automate all menial jobs, crunch more data and make this world a better place, not steal creative content made by humans and make second rate copies.

  source
• ZWQbpkzl@hexbear.net ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What were they doing with AI in Physics and Chemistry? I’ve only heard of Biology/Organic-Chemistry uses.

  source

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    What were they doing with AI in Physics and Chemistry?

    Grifting.

    source
• IndustryStandard@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  A I!

  source
• Godort@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  To be fair, the protein folding thing is legitimately impressive and an actual good use for the technology that isnt just harvesting people’s creativity for profit.

  source

  • uis@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    the technology that isnt just harvesting people’s creativity for profit.

    It’s the system harvesting people’s creativity for profit. Capitalism did it, capitalism does that, capitalism will always do that. In best case. Otherwise it will harvest people entirely.

    source