this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
598 points (96.4% liked)

Technology

63277 readers
4052 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"The real benchmark is: the world growing at 10 percent," he added. "Suddenly productivity goes up and the economy is growing at a faster rate. When that happens, we'll be fine as an industry."

Needless to say, we haven't seen anything like that yet. OpenAI's top AI agent — the tech that people like OpenAI CEO Sam Altman say is poised to upend the economy — still moves at a snail's pace and requires constant supervision.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] weker01@sh.itjust.works 11 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

What algorithm are you referring to?

The fundamental idea to use matrix multiplication plus a non linear function, the idea of deep learning i.e. back propagating derivatives and the idea of gradient descent in general, may not have changed but the actual algorithms sure have.

For example, the transformer architecture (that is utilized by most modern models) based on multi headed self attention, optimizers like adamw, the whole idea of diffusion for image generation are I would say quite disruptive.

Another point is that generative ai was always belittled in the research community, until like 2015 (subjective feeling would need meta study to confirm). The focus was mostly on classification something not much talked about today in comparison.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Wow i didn't expect this to upset people.

When I say it hasn't fundamentally changed from an AI perspective i mean there is no intelligence in artificial Intelligence.

There is no true understanding of self, just what we expect to hear. There is no problem solving, the step by steps the newer bots put out are still just ripped from internet search results. There is no autonomous behavior.

AI does not meet the definitions of AI, and no amount of long winded explanations of fundamentally the same approach will change that, and neither will spam downvotes.

[–] weker01@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Btw I didn't down vote you.

Your reply begs the question which definition of AI you are using.

The above is from Russells and Norvigs "Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach" 3rd edition.

I would argue that from these 8 definitions 6 apply to modern deep learning stuff. Only the category titled "Thinking Humanly" would agree with you but I personally think that these seem to be self defeating, i.e. defining AI in a way that is so dependent on humans that a machine never could have AI, which would make the word meaningless.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

I'm just sick of marketing teams calling everything AI and ruining what used to be a clear goal by getting people to move the bar and compromise on what used to be rigid definitions.

I studied AI in school and am interested in it as a hobby, but these machine aren't at the point of intelligence, despite us making them feel real.

I base my personal evaluations comparing it to an autonomous being with all the attributes I described above.

ChatGPT, and other chatbots, knows what it is because it searches the web for itself, and in fact it was programmed to repeat canned responses about itself when asked because it was saying crazy shit it was finding on the internet before.

Sam Altman and many other big names in tech have admitted that we have pretty much reached the limits of what current ML models can acheive, and we basically have to reinvent a new and more efficient method of ML to keep going.

If we were to go off Alan Turing's last definition then many would argue even ChatGPT meets those definitions, but even he increased and refined his definition of AI over the years before he died.

Personally I don't think we're there yet, and by the definitons I was taught back before AI could be whatever people called it we aren't there either. I'm trying to find who specifically made the checklist for intelligencei remember, if I do I will post it here.