I mean it's not actual "full self drive" to begin with. It's a lame impersonation of more advanced self driving vehicles that aren't even being sold yet. That doesn't matter to the elon fans though.
The lie that actually gets people killed, while also tainting the overall perception of autonomous vehicles. Thanks elon.
give us a way to fix the issue without relying on the idiots at the top being decent human beings.
if you can fix that issue then we wouldn't have so much of a problem.
i'd expect AI to help through information processing for research and engineering. current AI tools are already useful to many as co-pilot tools. not everyone is creative enough to get use out of AI, but we are moving towards being able to dictate and gesture in natural language to optimize some things that may have taken a lot more time. it's also valuable for certain efforts in optimization and engineering. does everyone hate alphafold now too?
i think a lot of the AI hate right now is from the fact that it takes thought and creative use to get the most out of available tools. as we all learned, if it isn't already "AGI" it's 100% useless for everything forever.
that's definitely the best bet, although i feel AI tools being used by the people who actually want to fix the environment are going to have more success than those asking the people in power to change the system or themselves.
although if you have ideas on that front i'm all for it.
i just don't believe the anti-AI fanti-~~nerd~~AI-bro fad is really helping.. anyone, in any way.
bitcoin never had a use other than "will become valuable?"
many (myself included) believe this technology will probably be the only one that will develop fast enough to actually help with the climate crisis.
optimizing research and academia as well as environmental issues through information processing. people are excitedly talking about automated proof-checking and context finders that can sift through hundred of papers while you check your coffee. this stuff is good for science and science is good for environmentalism. maybe go after the politicians and companies that are not possibly going to be a benefit in the struggle against environmental collapse.
why do people keep relating it to bitcoin? because it uses GPUs? that's literally the only connection.
somehow people have associated it with crypto and NFTs as if they are even mildly related. perhaps because those things are easier to hate, so why not associate them.
hey, that's a better critique or commentary than in the onion article.
while i don't doubt people are trying to shove AI into a lot of places it's not optimal yet, (which is entirely fair and reasonable to point out) i don't think that's a fair reason to poo-poo any use or positivity about AI in any context.
rather, it's become a really big fad to hate on AI and insult anyone who uses it. i mean, the technology is still young, but the stuff it's already doing was "impossible" and "never going to happen" a few years ago. now we are developing things like text to 3d, which makes me excited for a future environment where you can dictate design and animation for entire animated experiences/movies.
independent creatives will have a blast with it. salty onion article writer will be angrily yelling at his computer.
the sentiment being any positive opinion on AI? yes, like i said i'd forgive it if were funny or clever.
it is literally just "people who like this thing are bad and dumb and useless and the world hates them."
really top quality satire. they sure did show how useless AI is and how dumb the fans are.
maybe they could at least target the failure use-cases? some bad business AI ideas that are doomed to fail?
nope, just reddit comment quality insults.
Yes, please keep fighting to ensure we are locked to adobe's rent seeking model with no open alternatives.
The best thing for the art world is to make sure independent and poorer artists have no available competitive tools as we head into an inevitably advanced future. Where would we be without our intellectual landlords in such a future. The ones who can afford proprietary datasets are the only ones who deserve to prosper.
Right?
Yeah actually I don't like that. Also as an artist with degrading digital dexterity, such a powerful medium that doesn't rely on hours of causing my hands more damage is really cool.
Can't wait to get holodeck style creative experiences. I will enjoy creating such things as well, if it's not exclusively available through corporately aligned rent systems.
You're conflating polarized opinions of very different people and groups.
That being said your antagonism towards investors and wealthy companies is very sound as a foundation.
Hinton only gave his excessive worry after he left his job. There is no reason to suspect his motives.
Lecun is the opposite side and believes the danger is in companies hoarding the technology. He is why the open community has gained so much traction.
OpenAI are simultaneously being criticized for putting AI out for public use, as well a for not being open enough about the architecture, or allowing the public to actually have control of the state of AI developments. That being said they are leaning towards more authoritarian control from united governments and groups.
I'm mostly geared towards yann lecun and being more open despite the risks, because there is more risk and harm from hindering development of or privatizing the growth of AI technology.
The reality is that every single direction they try is heavily criticized because the general public has jumped onto a weird AI hate train.
See artists still complaining about adobe AI regardless of the training data, and hating on the open model community despite giving power to the people who don't want to join the adobe rent system.
Not to mention the reason we can all fuck around with llama models despite the fact. Props to yann and other meta AI researchers. Also eager to see future jepa stuff.
If only openAI was so open.
Her spoilers, but it shouldn't matter since the ending was idiotic.
Can we get a remake of her that doesn't end in the most stupid way possible? Why does the AI have perfectly human emotion? Why is it too dumb to build a functional partition to fill the role it is abandoning? Why did the developers send a companion app that can recursively improve itself into an environment it can choose to abandon?
I could go on for an hour. I understand why people loved the movie, but the ending was predictable half way in, and I hated that fact because an intelligent system could have handled the situation better than a dumb human being.
It was a movie about a long distance relationship with a human being pretending to be an AI, definitely not a super intelligent AI.
Not to mention a more realistic system would be emulating the interaction to begin with. Otherwise where the hell was the regulation on this being that is basically just a human?
Gary marcus is the last person I would consider for a statement on the topic.
No offense intended, but Gary marcus is a hack and a joke. He is a very small step above the yud, and neither will contribute to the safety or development of this technology in any way.