“oooo books he must be really smart”
One of my favorite examples is when a company from India (I think?) trained their model to regulate subway gates. The system was supposed to analyze footage and open more gates when there were more people, and vice versa. It worked well until one holiday when there were no people, but all gates were open. They eventually discovered that the system was looking at the clock visible on the video, rather than the number of people.
Reminds me of the time a military algorithm was accidentally trained to conclude that tanks are only concealed in tree lines on overcast days.
Just an expensive timer.
I really hate that we are calling this wave of technology “AI”, because it isn’t. It is “Machine Learning” sure, but it is just brute force pattern recognition v2.0.
The desired outcomes you define and then the data you train it on both have a LOT of built-in biases.
It’s a cool technology I guess, but it’s being misused across the board. It is being overused and misused by every company with FOMO. Hoping to get some profit edge on the competition. How about we have AI replace the bullshit CEO and VP positions instead of trying to replace fast food drive through workers and Internet content.
I guess that’s nothing new for humans… One human invents the spear for fishing and the rest use them to hit each other over the head.
I agree with most of your points, but i don’t entirely like the “this is not intelligence” line of thought. We don’t even know yet how to define intelligence, and pattern recognition sounds a LOT like what our brains do. The hype is of course ridiculous, and the ways it’s being used is just stupid, but i do think pattern recognition could be a solid basis for whatever we end up considering intelligence.
Pattern recognition is one thing that our brains do, it is a very long way away from the only thing our brains do.
[citation needed]
But yeah, that’s the kind of discussion i’d love to see in more depth :). When would an AI be considered intelligent? It used to be passing the turing test, but now that’s being achieved the goalposts are moving, and that’s maybe for a good reason, but what will be the actual measure :).
Maybe it is human-like intelligence. It’s dumb as shit, but have you met people?
LMAO
But yeah, I guess at its core, human intelligence and machine intelligence are both just pattern recognition, but I guess my point is that calling it “AI” gives people this false sense that it is something it is not. AI has been a thing in Sci-fi for so long that we all think of Data from Star Trek or C-3PO from Star Wars and similar. When in reality it is more akin to a robot arm in a factory doing the same task really fast and really precisely, but it isn’t some adaptable all-purpose thing yet.
That for sure is a problem with all modern bullshit technologies they want to hype in order to get people to use/buy it.
Look at smart tv’s… everyone assumes they’re awesome since they’re smart tv’s, that’s of course better than a regular tv. They’ll of course never mention that this just means that it’s a tv with a 100$ android box embedded that they’ll abuse to try to serve you extra ads, that they’ll not bother to update so your tv becomes obsolete in a couple of years, and that you can achieve the same thing by just buying the android box sepearately and connect that to a regular tv, which won’t make your entire tv become obsolete when the cheap android box doesn’t get updated anymore…
So yeah, i can imagine you have an issue with it being marked as (competent) AI.
Yeah for real.
Smart TVs, Subscription services, etc.
It’s all just capitalism doing its thing, everyone racing to sell sell sell.
All you are saying is, is that intelligence isnt as smart as we think, that human intelligence is actually pretty dumb. That doesnt change anything about the current situation even if thats true though.
So we all agree its actually human level intelligence now, what then? Can we stop developing it and do something else now?
Lol, wtf XD
“That doesnt change anything about the current situation even if thats true though.”
Yeah, i assumed me writing “I agree with most of your points” conveyed that. Do you always imagine random things to attack instead of just reading what people actually write?
wtf O_o
I just don’t like people being like “but it’s not real intelligence” while we don’t even know what intelligence is, and we’re thus avoiding the one part of this stupid hype that could be interesting:: philosophical questions about our own intelligence/humanity/…
Do you always argue the most boring parts of any issue as a rule? You win the argument, congratulations I hope it changes the world.
Do you always change the topic to try and “win” online discussions? And act so unnecessarily hostile for no reason at all to people who want to have interesting online discussions?
I find the topic of whether it’s intelligence the most interesting part of this. It raises a lot of questions. That the current hype is ridiculous that a lot of the energy expended on it is a complete waste, and that most of the ways AI is used is beyond stupid isn’t even worth talking about, that’s just plain obvious.
I think you might be projecting your own hostility there.
And you are just hijacking the AI conversation to argue about what the word intelligence means. I thought you wanted to talk about AI thats why I originally replied. When I realized you just wanted to apparently correct the public about their use of your favorite word, I decided this wasnt worth it.
Its sort of like you went to a bowling forum, and were very excited to discuss the mineral contents of the oil on the bowling lane, but got upset when noone cared to discuss with you because they just want to talk about bowling.
Dude, just stop. You’re looking for things that aren’t there. Period.
I find it an interesting question whether it’s intelligent or not, and find it sad people throw out that question together with the rest of the hype. It’s not “my favourite word”, and i’m not projecting my hostility. You just can’t seem to handle someone bringing any bit of nuance to a discussion…
And me projecting hostility XD. yeahhhh… introspection isn’t one of your gifts it seems XD. I’m the one being hostile XD. roflmao XD. I mean just here “your favorite word”… wtf dude, exaggerate much to make yet another pointless jab at me?? I’m not allowed to find this an interesting question without you painting me as someone who fixates on that one thing in the world and makes it sound as if my world revolves around “AI IS INTELLIGENT!!!”… I’m not even convinced it is, but i find it a mighty interesting question that requires more thought than it’s getting.
Sorry for trying to argue something i find interesting on lemmy. I’ll just shut up next time and not try to bring up points you might not find interesting since you seem to take that as a personal offence, while you could have just shut up and let the adults have a nice conversation on the one interesting part of this hype.
This has job descrimination lawsuit written all over it.
Answering the question in the image: machine learning arose from the industrial control world. The idea was to teach a machine how to detect defects in supposedly identical objects out of a manufacturing line, most often with “machine vision” (ie. a camera). Applying it to humans was asinine.
I know right? I have seen seen vision systems do some impressive things, but they are carefully calibrated to work in a specific way under certain conditions. Some of the ones my company works with get fed CAD in real time so the robot knows what to look for.
That reminds me of the time, quite a few years ago, Amazon tried to automate resume screening. They trained a machine learning model with anonymized resumes and whether the candidate was hired. Then they looked at what the AI was looking at. The model had trained itself on how to reject women.
Another similar “shortcut” I’ve heard about was that a system that analyzed job performance determined that the two key factors were being named “Jared” and playing lacrosse in high school.
And, these are the easy-to-figure-out ones we know about.
If the bias is more complicated, it might never be spotted.
I don’t understand why anyone writing, reading or commenting on this think a bookshelf would not change the outcome? Like what do you people think these ml models are, human brains? Are we still not below even the first layer of understanding?
The problem is the hysteria behind it, leading people to confuse good sounding information with good information. At least when people generally produce information they tend to make an effort to get it right. Machine learning is just an uncaring bullshitting machine, that is rewarded on the basis of the ability to fool people (turns out the Turing test was a crappy benchmark for practice-ready AI besides writing poems), and VC money hasn’t reached the “find out” phase of that looming lesson, when we all just get collectively exhausted by how underwhelming the AI fad is.
I fucking hate that extraversion is a measured trait 🙄
Should’ve gotten better genes from your parents then. Too bad you turned out to be the fastest swimmer. We really missed out on the next Einstein and got… you 🤢
It’s from the OCEAN model of personality, which is currently the most widely accepted model. It’s received less criticism than myers-briggs and astrology.
It’s received less criticism than myers-briggs and astrology.
That’s not a high bar to meat.
is it a high bar to vegetable? i would simply downvote but there is no option
Of course it isn’t. Measuring personality is impossible. All personality models are wrong, and they always will be.
I hate that they think bookshelves are an indicator for it
One web LLM I was screwing around with had Job Interview as a preset. Ok. Played it totally straight the first time and had a totally positive outcome. Thought the interviewer way too agreeable. The next time I said the most inappropriate stuff I could imagine and still the interviewer agreed to come home with me to check out the rock collection I keep under my bed and listen to Captain Beefheart albums.
Listening to some Captain Beefheart, huh… I’ll grab my shiny rocks!
It’s from 2021. Link to the website: https://interaktiv.br.de/ki-bewerbung/en/
Still pretty interesting though.
I would be interested to see what happens if you lighten up her skin color a bit…
Go full albinism
Conventionally attractive white people, stealing all your jobs!
There’s a ton of great small scale things we can do with machine learning, and even LLM.
Unfortunately, it seems the main usages will be crushing people down even more.
Yup. AI should be used to automate all of the mundane day-to-day BS, leaving us free to practice art, or poetry, or literature, or study, or just do leisure activities. Because all of the mundane BS is automated, so we don’t need to worry about things like income or where our next meal comes from. But instead, we went down the dystopian capitalist timeline, where we’re automating all of the art so artists are forced to get mundane day-to-day BS jobs.
Adapt or die. The world doesn’t care about useless feelings.
Bit it does if you Photoshop a bookshelf in your background?
Neofeudalism
Technobarbarism
Cyber-savagery
“Machine learning” is perfectly cromulent. The bias is what it learned, because that’s what it was taught. (Not intentionally, I don’t think. It’s just hard to get this stuff right sometimes.)
It is bias laundering though. They hide behind an “objective” algorithm, which was trained on a huge dataset of past
biasedhiring decisions.Job interviews are all bias regardless of whether they’re automated 😅
I’m really good at my job.
But that’s not why I got my job, it’s just a coincidence.
I got my job because I’m pretty good at interviews.
Garbage in garbage out
Garbage all around
Recruiters: “people are using AI to apply! Shame on those lazy wage slaves!”
Also recruiters:
To be fair, this works with humans, too.
Yes, contradicting the claim that it’s “more objective”.
Hence the comment about “bias automation”
AI reflects its training data??? Shocking!
