this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
792 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

58808 readers
4491 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bamfic@lemmy.world 63 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (16 children)

I am old enough to remember when the CEO of Nortel Networks got crucified by Wall Street for saying in a press conference that the telecom/internet/carrier boom was a bubble, and the fundamentals weren't there (who is going to pay for long distance anymore when calls are free over the internet? where are the carriers-- Nortel's customers-- going to get their income from?). And 4 years later Nortel ceased to exist. Cisco crashed too, though had enough TCP/IP router biz and enterprise sales to keep them alive even until today.

This all reminds me of the late 1990s internet bubble rather than the more recent crypto bubble. We'll all still be using ML models for all kinds of things more or less forever from now on, but it won't be this idiotic hype cycle and overvaluation anymore after the crash.

Shit, crypto isn't going anywhere either, it's a permanent fixture now, Wall Street bought into it and you can buy crypto ETFs from your stockbroker. We just don't have to listen to hype about it anymore.

[–] fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc 29 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Crypto is still just as awful as it ever was IMO. Still plenty of assholes ~~gambling~~ investing in crypto.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] wrekone@lemmyf.uk 17 points 19 hours ago

Well put.

Soon, it won't be this idiotic hype cycle, but it'll be some other idiotic hype cycle. Short term investors love hype cycles.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago

We just don’t have to listen to the hype about it anymore.

True, it’s now in most circles just been mixed in as a commodity to trade on. Though I wish everyone would get that. There’s still plenty of idiots with .eth usernames who think there’s some new boon to be made. The only “apps” built on crypto networks were and are purely for trading crypto, I’ve never seen any real tangible benefit to society come out of it. It’s still used plenty for money laundering, but regulators are (slowly) catching up. And it’s still by far the easiest way to demonstrate what happens to unregulated markets.

https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Hackworth@lemmy.world -5 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

To be clear, it'll be 10-30 years before AI displaces all human jobs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] poo@lemmy.world 209 points 1 day ago (9 children)

No bubble has deserved to pop as much as AI deserves to

[–] Disaster@sh.itjust.works 6 points 15 hours ago

Maybe real estate?

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 163 points 1 day ago (19 children)

Blockchain and crypto were worse. „AI” has some actual use even if it’s way overblown.

I mean, block chain does have some actual uses, definitely more niche than LLMs though.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 92 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Creating a specialized neural net to perform a specific function is cool. Slapping GPT into customer support because you like money is horse shit and I hope your company collapses. But yeah you're right. Blockchain was a solution with basically no problems to fix. Neural nets are a tool that can do a ton of things, but everyone is content to use them as a hammer.

[–] astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz 34 points 1 day ago

Yes! "AI" defined as only LLMs and the party trick applications is a bubble. AI in general has been around for decades and will only continue to grow.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 52 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm glad you didn't say NFTs because my Bored Ape will regain and triple its value any day now!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 58 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Crypto has a legitimate value, you can buy drugs with it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago (16 children)

10 to 30? Yeah I think it might be a lot longer than that.

Somehow everyone keeps glossing over the fact that you have to have enormous amounts of highly curated data to feed the trainer in order to develop a model.

Curating data for general purposes is incredibly difficult. The big medical research universities have been working on it for at least a decade, and the tools they have developed, while cool, are only useful as tools too a doctor that has learned how to use them. They can speed diagnostics up, they can improve patient outcome. But they cannot replace anything in the medical setting.

The AI we have is like fancy signal processing at best

[–] FatCrab@lemmy.one 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

AI in health and medtech has been around and in the field for ages. However, two persistent challenges make roll out slow-- and they're not going anywhere because of the stakes at hand.

The first is just straight regulatory. Regulators don't have a very good or very consistent working framework to apply to to these technologies, but that's in part due to how vast the field is in terms of application. The second is somewhat related to the first but really is also very market driven, and that is the issue of explainability of outputs. Regulators generally want it of course, but also customers (i.e., doctors) don't just want predictions/detections, but want and need to understand why a model "thinks" what it does. Doing that in a way that does not itself require significant training in the data and computer science underlying the particular model and architecture is often pretty damned hard.

I think it's an enormous oversimplification to say modern AI is just "fancy signal processing" unless all inference, including that done by humans, is also just signal processing. Modern AI applies rules it is given, explicitly or by virtue of complex pattern identification, to inputs to produce outputs according to those "given" rules. Now, what no current AI can really do is synthesize new rules uncoupled from the act of pattern matching. Effectively, a priori reasoning is still out of scope for the most part, but the reality is that that simply is not necessary for an enormous portion of the value proposition of "AI" to be realized.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Not an expert so I might be wrong, but as far as I understand it, those specialised tools you describe are not even AI. It is all machine learning. Maybe to the end user it doesn't matter, but people have this idea of an intelligent machine when its more like brute force information feeding into a model system.

[–] RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 22 hours ago (7 children)

Don't say AI when you mean AGI.

By definition AI (artificial intelligence) is any algorithm by which a computer system automatically adapts to and learns from its input. That definition also covers conventional algorithms that aren't even based on neural nets. Machine learning is a subset of that.

AGI (artifical general intelligence) is the thing you see in movies, people project into their LLM responses and what's driving this bubble. It is the final goal, and means a system being able to perform everything a human can on at least human level. Pretty much all the actual experts agree we're a far shot from such a system.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 71 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

As a major locally-hosted AI proponent, aka a kind of AI fan, absolutely. I'd wager it's even worse than crypto, and I hate crypto.

What I'm kinda hoping happens is that bitnet takes off in the next few months/years, and that running a very smart model on a phone or desktop takes milliwatts... Who's gonna buy into Sam Altman $7 trillion cloud scheme to burn the Earth when anyone can run models offline on their phones, instead of hitting APIs running on multi-kilowatt servers?

And ironically it may be a Chinese company like Alibaba that pops the bubble, lol.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ulkesh@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Wow, a CEO who doesn’t buy into the hype? That’s astonishing.

I, for one, cannot wait for the bubble to burst so we can get back to some sense of sanity.

Edit>> Though if Baidu is investing in AI like all the rest, then maybe they just think they’ll be immune — in which case I’m sad again that I haven’t yet come across a CEO who calls bullshit on this nonsense.

AI will have its uses, and it has practical use cases such as helping people to walk or to speak or to translate in real time, etc. But we’re decades away from what all these CEOs seem to think they’re going to cash in on now. And it’ll be fun on some level watching them all be wrong.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu -1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Chinese tech leader wants west to slow down their progress on AI

[–] agelord@lemmy.world -2 points 8 hours ago
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›