|
Main Paineframe posted:the fact that they use jargon like "learning" doesn't change the fact that it appears to be about as AI as an old Lego Mindstorms set. It's literally what AI is. It's literally a paper from the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory by a woman that is getting a PHD studying machine learning an AI. That is literally what AI is. It's not demon summoning where they call spirits into golems or something, it's just "boring old programming" aimed at a set of tasks that are easy for humans and hard for machines. That is literally what artificial intelligence is.
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
This is reminding me of the robot specialization posts; someone took a stance that automation wouldn't be a threat until we had Android's who replicated human activities. Because how else could they replace human workers?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:This is reminding me of the robot specialization posts; someone took a stance that automation wouldn't be a threat until we had Android's who replicated human activities. Because how else could they replace human workers? Sometimes revolution happens... and nothings change. In the 90's everyone got a printer. So technically everyone can write their own books. You can get Office Word and write a book. WOA, everyoene can turn into a writter. It was the autoedition revolution and it changed absolutely nothing. Something like that could happen with 3D printers. Once everyone have a 3D printer at home, maybe nothing will change. The internet did change many things, but even the things the internet killed are sorta alive. The press is still alive, the music world are still alive. TV was sell has a amazing education tool. Put a teacher in front a camera and he will be able to teach every american children at the same time!!. Instead of having a personal teacher for every kid, a TV for every family. It changed...... other stuff, but not this. It helped education in adults more than in childrens, but it was much more a double edge sword than a education tool. So yea. Maybe we would get full automation. Whole production chains automatized to the last job. And nothing changing. All I say is it has happened before (I don't think will happen with this).
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's literally what AI is. It's literally a paper from the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory by a woman that is getting a PHD studying machine learning an AI. That is literally what AI is. It's not demon summoning where they call spirits into golems or something, it's just "boring old programming" aimed at a set of tasks that are easy for humans and hard for machines. That is literally what artificial intelligence is. You appear to have left a couple of words off the name of the "Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory". Which isn't surprising, since "but it's the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory" is basically the only reasoning you've offered for how this qualifies as a revolutionary AI breakthrough, rather than an improved user experience for entering tasks into existing factory robots. As the paper itself states, C-LEARN is just "better assisted planning and interaction techniques to enable operators to efficiently and remotely control high-DoF robots". It's robotics and it's certainly extremely relevant to automation, but that doesn't make it AI!
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:It's robotics and it's certainly extremely relevant to automation, but that doesn't make it AI! For the edification of the thread, could you perhaps explain what the difference is between AI and plain old programming?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:You appear to have left a couple of words off the name of the "Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory". Which isn't surprising, since "but it's the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory" is basically the only reasoning you've offered for how this qualifies as a revolutionary AI breakthrough, rather than an improved user experience for entering tasks into existing factory robots. That is literally all that AI is. The AI research coming out of MIT is always going to be lame lameos writing C++ code and database to do some boring vector math or whatever. AI research is never ever someone yelling "I've got it!" then mashing a keyboard till a pod opens and steam clears and a large breasted women with metal skin steps out and says "yes...my...master". All AI even ever has been is stuff like you did with your mindstorms but way more complex. Even when they do future sounding stuff like neural nets they are just sitting down on dull old compilers and writing some dumb old computer programs to do some stupid boring math.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Berkeley researchers teach computers to be curiousquote:Each "branch", or decision, in that tree has a weighted value that's determined from previous experiences and the relative rewards associated with them. This is known as "reinforcement learning" and is basically the same way you train a dog: rewarding effective behavior and discouraging the ineffective. I'm sure Main Paineframe will soon explain that this "appears to be about as AI as an old Lego Mindstorms set".
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:For the edification of the thread, could you perhaps explain what the difference is between AI and plain old programming? A system capable of learning something that it was not given explicit instructions for. The ability to adapt to changes, even small ones. A robot arm that can move its grabber based on input from a camera could be classified as AI, there's a lot of overlap between AI and machine learning. Automation is just... Doing something with less labor. A robot arm that requires specific instructions for an order of operations and exact positions to make a weld would be Plain Old Programming applied to automation. Algorithms that churn through data way faster than a person could but still apply no self-adapting mechanisms would be plain old programming.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:For the edification of the thread, could you perhaps explain what the difference is between AI and plain old programming? Isn't this the wrong question? You should be asking what my personal definition of "artificial intelligence" is, since basically everyone in this thread seems to have completely different definitions for that and a number of other words and phrases. I don't really intend to go in-depth on it since it seems like we can't go half a page without someone redefining a word. But for the purposes of this thread, I'd say that 'when a machine mimics "cognitive" functions that humans associate with other human minds, such as "learning" and "problem solving"' sounds close enough to the commonly-understood meaning of AI. If you're going to claim that literally all programming counts as AI, then you've expanded the field of AI to cover everything from ordinary pocket calculators to V2 rockets. Rastor posted:Berkeley researchers teach computers to be curious Actually, it seems to be a decent attempt at slightly broadening the horizons of machine learning? You've got to learn to read beyond the headline, man.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
Tei posted:Sometimes revolution happens... and nothings change. Are you joking? Desktop publishing absolutely was a revolution in the 90s, and still is to an extent. All of a sudden people had the ability to print professional-looking flyers, pamphlets, and company presentations from their home or office. The shift was huge, and all but killed the traditional commercial printing operations that required experienced operators, replacing them with minimum wage employees running Xerox machines. But I guess people aren't printing novels at home so nothing changed. 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
I've been watching Richard Hamming's lectures, and he says that he avoids pointless debate by defining intelligence as "whatever we can't program computers to do yet." Or put another way, now that we're all used to computers as no big deal, anything we figure out how to program them to do, we're inclined to rationalize as also no big deal. Our instinctive descriptive definition of "AI" is "crazy poo poo that hasn't happened yet," so anything that actually happens doesn't seem like it could be AI.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Baronash posted:Are you joking? Desktop publishing absolutely was a revolution in the 90s, and still is to an extent. All of a sudden people had the ability to print professional-looking flyers, pamphlets, and company presentations from their home or office. The shift was huge, and all but killed the traditional commercial printing operations that required experienced operators, replacing them with minimum wage employees running Xerox machines. Sorry, I am not informed about that. So home printers killed jobs? I still see people writing notes manually or using comic sans. People don't seems to care about the printer, they replace by a pen if they need to. I was not aware it had a effect that big.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Taffer posted:no self-adapting mechanisms would be plain old programming. What would it be? wizards?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:What would it be? wizards? I think you misread that. I meant a system that never adapts to anything and runs predefined algorithms based on predetermined conditions would NOT be AI, it would just be a normal program.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
Taffer posted:I think you misread that. I meant a system that never adapts to anything and runs predefined algorithms based on predetermined conditions would NOT be AI, it would just be a normal program. It's all algorithms! algorithms is all there is! They are all normal programs. There isn't algorithms then also some super special spark of life other thing we can use. It's just some other algorithms.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's all algorithms! algorithms is all there is! They are all normal programs. There isn't algorithms then also some super special spark of life other thing we can use. It's just some other algorithms. You can say "it's all algorithms" but that's splitting hairs to miss a point. Yes, it's all algorithms, but it's not all human-written algorithms for human-written conditions. AI isn't some grand leap to human cognition. It's a blurry transition from high-level programming to higher-level programming.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
Tei posted:Sorry, I am not informed about that. So home printers killed jobs? If you wanted a hundred flyers for your lost cat or something in the days before home printers, you had to either individually write out all one hundred flyers or go to a print shop and work with them to design and print those flyers. Nowadays, even if you don't have your own printer, you can use desktop publishing software (or even simpler tools) to design it yourself and print it off at a library or Kinko's for less than a buck. It's one of those things where a lot of jobs and expertise were automated away, but it happened just long enough ago that people don't even realize it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Taffer posted:You can say "it's all algorithms" but that's splitting hairs to miss a point. Yes, it's all algorithms, but it's not all human-written algorithms for human-written conditions. AI isn't some grand leap to human cognition. It's a blurry transition from high-level programming to higher-level programming. I don't know man, we had a computer win on jeopardy. If that's not the best act of artificial intelligence ever achieved at least it's the most ostentatious. But it was all just databases and algorithms, and lots and lots and lots of training data and no spiritualism or "next level" higher whatever anything. I don't think anyone should ever expect AI to ever be anything but normal clever stuff done on a grand scale. I don't think you should really even expect that your own brain is going to end up being anything but a ~600mb blob of dna providing a set of initial conditions, a bunch of mundane (but maybe elegant) rules for nerve behavior and a really good set of training data that you develop over years and decades of life.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
The Rules For a space that is 'populated': - Each cell with one or no neighbors dies, as if by solitude. - Each cell with four or more neighbors dies, as if by overpopulation. - Each cell with two or three neighbors survives. For a space that is 'empty' or 'unpopulated' - Each cell with three neighbors becomes populated. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP5-iIeKXE8 Edit: It need more words to explain the above video than the rules that direct it. another video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2vgICfQawE Tei fucked around with this message at 22:42 on May 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:If you wanted a hundred flyers for your lost cat or something in the days before home printers, you had to either individually write out all one hundred flyers or go to a print shop and work with them to design and print those flyers. Nowadays, even if you don't have your own printer, you can use desktop publishing software (or even simpler tools) to design it yourself and print it off at a library or Kinko's for less than a buck. It's one of those things where a lot of jobs and expertise were automated away, but it happened just long enough ago that people don't even realize it. Yeah, I actually had a friend in the mid-90s whose parents ran a little mom & pop printing shop and this was a huge, huge issue for them. His dad ended up moving into web development and I think the shop ultimately closed down. There are a lot of little things like that where the level of expertise required for high-end commercial products is still high, but there's no longer a need for specialist stores or workers at the consumer level.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Tei posted:The Rules Google's new TPUs use Systolic Arrays
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:If you wanted a hundred flyers for your lost cat or something in the days before home printers, you had to either individually write out all one hundred flyers or go to a print shop and work with them to design and print those flyers.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:You could always borrow your local school or church's ditto machine. But yeah, the mid-end where it had to look better than that got hit a lot by home printers. This is generally the rinse-repeat cycle of automation. The high effort complicated items resist automation while anything templated/mildly repetitive/simple gets automated or given a simple interface for consumers to do on their own. For any kind of business that serves both complicated and uncomplicated markets, automation usually kills them or forces them to change their model because often the price for high- A side effect of all of this is that while common items become cheap and prolific, El Mero Mero fucked around with this message at 14:40 on May 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:A side effect of all of this is that while common items become cheap and prolific, quality/complicated items become increasingly rare or are only able to survive by drastically raising prices (charging the true price) and catering to niche markets of elites that can afford it. What examples are you thinking about this? There is a lot of good-old-day-ism around the idea of "they don't build em like they used to" where people claim it around a wide range of products but actual data shows that newer ones actually are as good or better than the old ones. Like people of every age talk about cars as the worst they have ever been but data always shows the newest cars being the most reliable and longest lasting they've ever been almost every single year. Like 100,000 miles used to be almost a hard barrier for how long a car would last (looking it up, it wasn't until the late 70s they even made odometers that could go higher than 99,999), now it's something even the cheapest car you can buy will easily surpass.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:What examples are you thinking about this? sorry. I didn't mean to imply that the cheap items were bad - they're just bread & butter with large profit margins. Take the printer example from above. Regular type-setting and graphic design for even a newsletter used to have to go out to a shop and that shop would likely template basic stuff like that and make plenty of money off that too. When people could get those templates for free and print them at home on a cheap-o printer it forces the print shops to either focus exclusively on their more professional custom jobs or go out of business. other example: -Routine medical tests/exams/blood tests as well as very predictable operations like laser eye surgery. By consolidating the profitable and highly automatable items and cutting out everything else from the menu a single operation shop can drop prices, increase quality, serve more people, and be more profitable. The unintended side effect though is that that high-profit item on the hospital's menu is no longer there - so they have to raise prices across the board to keep offering their other (more critical) options.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:What examples are you thinking about this? Experienced croppers were driven out of work by the invention of cropping frames?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2017 11:14
|
|
|
This website is retard poo poo, useless crud, but this is the right thread to post it. https://willrobotstakemyjob.com/
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/businessinsider/status/872432214566240256
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
That's a good idea. The one time I picked something up from Walmart that I ordered online (a sim card) I had to wait in line for like half an hour.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2017 14:11
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSKi8HfcxEk Here's a video to compliant CGP Grey's Humans Need Not Apply.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
So we're all machinegunned by the most wealthy when?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:So we're all machinegunned by the most wealthy when? Nah, us class traitors who have proven our loyalty in exchange for continuing access to food and medicine will be machinegunning/flamethrowering the rest. Eventually one of the egg-heads will invent a machine that kills us while still keeping them safe, but our goal is to ensure our progeny's place in the surviving strata through marriage, education, or wealth accumulation before then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Nah, us class traitors who have proven our loyalty in exchange for continuing access to food and medicine will be machinegunning/flamethrowering the rest. Eventually one of the egg-heads will invent a machine that kills us while still keeping them safe, but our goal is to ensure our progeny's place in the surviving strata through marriage, education, or wealth accumulation before then. You think that in a world of autonomous everything the tyrants would have any use for anything nearly so untrustworthy as those who would collaborate against their own people; that's adorable. Worse still, after that outburst your class won't take you back. You won't be welcome anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 06:26
|
|
|
Cicero posted:That's a good idea. The one time I picked something up from Walmart that I ordered online (a sim card) I had to wait in line for like half an hour. Doesn't seem like the kind of thing that'll really have much of an effect on employment, though. You still need people to do the picking and then deliver to and stock the kiosk. I could definitely see a company like Amazon using something like this with a slightly more automated supply chain in the future, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
It reduces the number of cashiers necessary, and opens the door to supermicromanagement or additional automation in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
dont be mean to me posted:Worse still, after that outburst your class won't take you back. You won't be welcome anywhere. If the working class was sufficiently organized that being blacklisted for my SA jokeposts was a thing I seriously had to worry about, this thread would be very different.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
Rastor posted:Berkeley researchers teach computers to be curious Quoting from a month ago but... What's the difference between this and setting the algorithm to go for the most profitable move only 90% of the time? Ten % of the time pick a sequence of less profitable ones. Then with new knowledge and in a new situation go back to the most profitable move etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
I a religious-ish matter, I believe. Some people is never going to accept that intelligence is a body function and like a muscle, some day we can make a machine that fulfill that body function, perhaps better. These people appear in threads like this one and they spread their special skepticism, and is okay. I sometimes engage because is fun. Anyway this thread (fortunately) is not about AI, many jobs can be killed with simple rule based algorithms. Trying to convince (or not) these people is the problem of other thread, not this one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Baronash posted:Are you joking? Desktop publishing absolutely was a revolution in the 90s, and still is to an extent. All of a sudden people had the ability to print professional-looking flyers, pamphlets, and company presentations from their home or office. The shift was huge, and all but killed the traditional commercial printing operations that required experienced operators, replacing them with minimum wage employees running Xerox machines. His view is also ignoring the self-publishing wave that was ushered in by ereaders. Now any idiot churning out thousands of pages of werewolf erotica can land on the New York Times Bestsellers list or sell millions of copies with no publisher support. Real publishers with real big overhead are now directly competing with Joe/Jane Schmo writing stories in their garage. Pair that with a $10 a month copy of Photoshop/licensed stock images and you have a product you can sell in the same digital store as Danielle Steel. So yeah, the price barrier being lowered on tools needed to create and the digitization of markets is absolutely clobbering traditional companies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Nah, us class traitors who have proven our loyalty in exchange for continuing access to food and medicine will be machinegunning/flamethrowering the rest. Eventually one of the egg-heads will invent a machine that kills us while still keeping them safe, but our goal is to ensure our progeny's place in the surviving strata through marriage, education, or wealth accumulation before then. Elysium was real. They are gonna have robot guards and doctors on their moon base while the rest of us madmax it down here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 13:20
|
|
