Your mistake is to ignore the 90% of “new technology” that never got anywhere. “new” doesn’t automatically mean that it is useful and will succeed much in the same way that “old” doesn’t automatically mean it is reliable and has been used for a good reason.
I wouldn’t lump all of AI together tbh.
If it’s used to help doctors diagnose things (like early stage cancer or whatever) or used to better sort flashcards for you when you’re using those to learn something?
What we call AI (I’m honestly kinda missing the “I” part everywhere) can be awesome there.
The absolute garbage that should never have existed is this so-called “creative AI” that just regurgitates bits of previously stolen art.
A lot of the classification stuff is crap too, like that one that was meant to identify tanks in satellite images but turned out to just pick images with clouds instead.
Mostly it is this whole new generation of AI where nobody really understands how it gets to the result and nobody can incrementally improve things that is a problem.
Classic machine learning with neural nets and similar mechanisms is just as good or bad as it was before the current hype.
Yeah I agree there. The term “AI” is treated as if it were the coming of God and the solution to all (non)existing problems and who would dare question God when he looks into your face? (Provided you believe in God that is.) Which is a major part of the actually existing problem with that stuff.
People already look at me funny when I call a smartphone my language’s equivalent of “mobile phone”. I always explain that well… it may be a phone among things, but it’s NOT smart. Yet somehow many seem to believe that because it has “smart” in it’s name it’s actually better, when actually it really heavily depends on what you want/need.
Your mistake is to ignore the 90% of “new technology” that never got anywhere. “new” doesn’t automatically mean that it is useful and will succeed much in the same way that “old” doesn’t automatically mean it is reliable and has been used for a good reason.
Sure but, Why sabotage new technology?
Let it be survival of the fittest.
The invention of Email cost many people in the paper industry their jobs. But the world is a better place with email instead of post.
There is a price to progress.
Nobody is sabotaging new technology, some of them are just crap all on their own and AI certainly falls into that category.
I wouldn’t lump all of AI together tbh. If it’s used to help doctors diagnose things (like early stage cancer or whatever) or used to better sort flashcards for you when you’re using those to learn something? What we call AI (I’m honestly kinda missing the “I” part everywhere) can be awesome there.
The absolute garbage that should never have existed is this so-called “creative AI” that just regurgitates bits of previously stolen art.
A lot of the classification stuff is crap too, like that one that was meant to identify tanks in satellite images but turned out to just pick images with clouds instead.
Mostly it is this whole new generation of AI where nobody really understands how it gets to the result and nobody can incrementally improve things that is a problem.
Classic machine learning with neural nets and similar mechanisms is just as good or bad as it was before the current hype.
Yeah I agree there. The term “AI” is treated as if it were the coming of God and the solution to all (non)existing problems and who would dare question God when he looks into your face? (Provided you believe in God that is.) Which is a major part of the actually existing problem with that stuff.
People already look at me funny when I call a smartphone my language’s equivalent of “mobile phone”. I always explain that well… it may be a phone among things, but it’s NOT smart. Yet somehow many seem to believe that because it has “smart” in it’s name it’s actually better, when actually it really heavily depends on what you want/need.
I’m commenting on the cartoon shared that seems to praise past movements where people sabotaged sewing machines etc.