• Godort@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    151
    ·
    2 months 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.

    • GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      87
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      The way to tell so often seems to be if someone has called it AI or Machine Learning.

      AI? “I put this through chatgpt” (or “The media department has us by the balls”)

      ML? “I crunched a huge amount of data in a huge amount of ways, and found something interesting”

      • keepthepace@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Actually I endorse the fact that we are less shy of calling “AI” algorithms that do exhibit emergent intelligence and broad knowledge. AI uses to be a legitimate name for the field that encompasses ML and we do understood a lot of interesting things about intelligence thanks to LLMs nowadays, like the fact that training on next-word-prediction is enough to create pretty complex world models, that transformer architectures are capable of abstraction or that morality arise naturally when you try to acquire all the pre-requisites to have a normal discussion with a human.

    • buttfarts@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      omg what is even the point of scientific progress and the advancement of human knowledge unless one specific person gets all the glory. What is science even for if not the validation of some human’s individual ego.

      • Donkter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean, what are most of us doing ever at all for all of history if not validating our individual egos in one way or another?

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        What is science even for if not the validation of some human’s individual ego.

        Satisfaction of personal curiosity with goverment funding

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month 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.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months 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. Also 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.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

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

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

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

      • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months 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.

        If generative AI could not create images the way it does I assure you we wouldn’t have the legion of etsy and patreon painters complaining about it.

        The nobel prize is not to generative AI, of course, it’s about the fathers of the fields and their complex neural networks that made most advanced since then possible.

        • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          It has been called like that since the 50s were it could do literally nothing because computer power wasn’t enough. It is the field that leads to an artificially created intelligence. We never had any issues with the name. No need for a rebrand.

          • Don_alForno@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            What we call AI today is also not going to evolve into an actual AI.

            You can call the field of research what you want, but the current products are not AI. Do you also call potatoes vodka?

  • IsoSpandy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    2 months 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.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The problem with AI isn’t the tech itself. It’s what capitalism is doing with it. Alongside what you say, using AI to achieve fully automated luxury gay space communism would be wonderful.

    • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t know if you’ve been paying attention to everything that’s happened since the industrial revolution but that’s not how it’s going to work

    • Sas [she/her]@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 months ago

      The problem is that it will be the rich that are the owners of the AI that stole your job so suddenly we peasants are no longer needed. We won’t be free, we will be broth.

      • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        Then you have a choice.

        Option 1. Halt scientific and technological progress and be robbed anyway because if capitalists do not get more money out of tech they are getting it out of making you work more hours for less money.

        Option 2. End capitalism.

        • oatscoop@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Option 3. Get a job as part of the 5% of the population still employed in serving the various security apparatuses protecting the rich fucks – you could be a soldier, cop, or government official.

          Better to be part of the boot than be the poor fuckers getting stepped on, right? You can sleep easily knowing you have it slightly better than the other 95% of the underclass.

      • IsoSpandy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well you see 100 people won’t be able to make soup of trillions. But you know what we a trillion people can do? Run the guillotine for a 100 times

        • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Well you see 100 people won’t be able to make soup of trillions.

          You should check out the climate catastrophe sometime.

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t get the ai hate sentiment.

      I don’t get what’s not to get. AI is a heap of bullshit that’s piled on top of a decade of cryptobros.

      it’s not even impressive enough to make a positive world impact in the 2-3 years it’s been publicly available.

      shit is going to crash and burn like web3.

      I’ve seen people put full on contracts that are behind NDAs through a public content trained AI.

      I’ve seen developers use cuck-pilot for a year and “never” code again… until the PR is sent back over and over and over again and they have to rewrite it.

      I’ve seen the AI news about new chemicals, new science, new _fill-in-the-blank and it all be PR bullshit.

      so yeah, I don’t believe AI is our savior. can it make some convincing porn? sure. can it do my taxes? probably not.

      • Vigge93@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        You are ignoring ALL of the of the positive applications of AI from several decades of development, and only focusing on the negative aspects of generative AI.

        Here is a non-exhaustive list of some applications:

        • In healthcare as a tool for earlier detection and prevention of certain diseases
        • For anomaly detection in intrusion detection system, protecting web servers
        • Disaster relief for identifying the affected areas and aiding in planning the rescue effort
        • Fall detection in e.g. phones and smartwatches that can alert medical services, especially useful for the elderly.
        • Various forecasting applications that can help plan e.g. production to reduce waste. Etc…

        There have even been a lot of good applications of generative AI, e.g. in production, especially for construction, where a generative AI can the functionally same product but with less material, while still maintaining the strength. This reduces cost of manufacturing, and also the environmental impact due to the reduced material usage.

        Does AI have its problems? Sure. Is generative AI being misused and abused? Definitely. But just because some applications are useless it doesn’t mean that the whole field is.

        A hammer can be used to murder someone, that does not mean that all hammers are murder weapons.

        • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Imaginary and unproven cases without any apparent “intelligence”.

          Seriously… Fall detection? It’s like 3 lines of code… Disaster relief? Show me any actual evidence of “AI” being used…

        • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          2 months ago

          give me at least two peer reviewed articles that AI has had a measurably positive impact on society over the last 24 months.

          shouldn’t be too hard for AI to come up with that, right?

          if you can do that then I’ll admit that AI has potential to become more than a crypto scam.

      • renzev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        When I hear “AI”, I think of that thing that proofreads my emails and writes boilerplate code. Just a useful tool among a long list of others. Why would I spend emotional effort hating it? I think people who “hate” AI are just as annoying as the people pushing it as the solution to all our problems.

        • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I don’t think anybody hates spell checkers if that’s what you consider “AI”.

          It’s more about the grifters pushing this phony “intelligence” as the savior/destroyer of humanity.

        • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          when I get an email written by AI, it means the person who sent it doesn’t deem me worth their time to respond to me themselves.

          I get a lot of email that I have to read for work. It used to be about 30 a day that I had to respond to. now that people are using AI, it’s at or over 100 a day.

          I provide technical consulting and give accurate feedback based on my knowledge and experience on the product I have built over the last decade and a half.

          if nobody is reading my email why does it matter if I’m accurate? if generative AI is training on my knowledge and experience where does that leave me in 5 years?

          business is built on trust, AI circumvents that trust by replacing the nuances between partners that grow that trust.

          • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Hi there GreenKnight23!

            I don’t think it’s necessarily you personally they find a waste of time… it might be the layers of fluff that most business emails contain. They don’t know if you’re the sort of person who expects it.

            Best Regards,

            Explodicle<br> Internet Comment Writer<br> sh.itjust.works

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        it’s not even impressive enough to make a positive world impact in the 2-3 years it’s been publicly available.

        It literally just won people two Nobel prizes

          • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 months ago

            It allows us to predict the structure of proteins before we make them. This can speed up research into protein-based medical treatments by astronomical amounts-- drugs which took years to develop through trial and error and/or thousands of hours of computational power can now be predicted beforehand in terms of their structure, which allows us to predict how they interact woth the proteins in our body. It’s an incredible breakthrough in the speed of medical research.

            • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              with the compute power required for models like alphafold, my guess is it will be at the monopoly of some corporation which will charge exorbitant prices for any drugs it develops through AI. Not a fault of AI itself, just fucking parasitic shareholder pigs which we should have eaten long ago.

              • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                That’s a bad faith question, but I’ll answer it anyways. It helps us because it means that we may now use the discoveries that won them the award.

            • bignate31@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              It’s hype like this that breaks the back of the public when “AI doesn’t change anything”. Don’t get me wrong: AlphaFold has done incredible things. We can now create computational models of proteins in a few hours instead of a decade. But the difference between a computational model and the actual thing is like the difference between a piece of cheese and yellow plastic: they both melt nicely but you’d never want one of them in your quesadilla.

      • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        If AI image generation is so bad why we have so many etsy and patreon artists complaining about it?

        If no one would use it because it is so bad why would anyone care that it is trained on their products?

        Do you know this joke about MAGA and the Schrodinger’s immigrant? They somehow believe that immigrants are both stealing people jobs and lazy and living on wellfare.

        AntiAI bros are somehow similar. AI is at the same time stealing artists jobs and completely useless incapable of producing nothing that people would want.

    • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      they will automate all menial jobs, fire %90 of the workers and ask remaining %10 to oversee the AI automated tasks while also doing all other tasks which can not be automated. all so that shareholders can add some more billions on top of their existing stack of billions.

    • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I would love AI. Still waiting for it. Probably 50 years away (if human society lasts that long).

      What I hate is the term being yet another scientific term to get stolen and watered down by brainless capitalists so they can scam money out of other brainless capitalists.

    • NicolaHaskell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sure, Eli Whitney.

      How about the machines automate the complicated jobs to make as many menial jobs for me as possible? Computers these days are all lazy. They could optimize scheduling so the neighbors and I all get time together and time apart for a hundred hours of kicking dirt down at the office each year, instead they hang around doing vapes and abstract paintings of hands.

    • redwattlebird@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      For me, it’s because AI is referring to a LLM, which is not AI. Also, these LLMs use a crap load of energy to do things that we can currently do ourselves for much less energy.

      But actual AI? Yes, please!

  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months 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 were told my sister in law was kidnapped, all through a phone call.

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

  • BleatingZombie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months 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)

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Its more like intelligience is very poorly defined so a less controversial statement is that Artificial General 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 and turing testers are chosen at random.

    • KingRandomGuy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months 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.

    • nialv7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months 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 (although there are plenty of people that would argue that we do). on the other hand if you consider the ability to play chess or go intelligence, the answer is different.

      • minyakcurry@monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months 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.

        • Adalast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I forget the exact quote or who said it, but the gist is that a species cannot be considered sapient (intelligent) on an interplanetary/interstellar stage until they have discovered Calculus. I prefer to use that as my bar for the sapience of those around me as well.

    • TriflingToad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months 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.