95% of Companies See ‘Zero Return’ on $30 Billion Generative AI Spend, MIT Report Finds
Technology
72
Beiträge
61
Kommentatoren
1
Aufrufe
-
This is what I try to explain to people but they just see it as a Google thats always correct
Garbage in, garbage out.
That's from back in the days of PUNCH-CARD computers.
-
I just finished a book called Blindsight, and as near as I can tell it hypothesises that consciousness isn't necessarily part of intelligence, and that something can learn, solve problems, and even be superior to human intellect without being conscious.
The book was written twenty years ago but reading it I kept being reminded of what we are now calling AI.
Great book btw, highly recommended.
In before someone mentions P-zombies.
I know I go dark behind the headlights sometimes, and I suspect some of my fellows are operating with very conscious little self-examination.
-
This feels like such a double head fake. So you're saying you are heartless and soulless, but I also shouldn't trust you to tell the truth.
It's got a lot of stolen data to source and sell back to us.
-
Still $10m... ffs. Nobody needs $1B
Honestly it's such a vast, democracy-eroding amount of money that it should be illegal. It's like letting an individual citizen own a small nuke.
Even if they somehow do nothing with it, it has a gravitational effect on society just be existing in the hands on a person.
-
Imagine how much more they could've just paid employees.
You misspelled “shares they could have bought back”
-
The first problem is the name. It's NOT artificial intelligence, it's artificial stupidity.
People BOUGHT intelligence but GOT stupidity.
It's frustrating because they used the technical term in a knowingly misleading way.
LLMs are artificial intelligence in the same way that a washing machines load and soil tuning systems are. Which is to say they are intelligent, but so are ants, earthworms, and slime molds. The detect stimuli, and react based on that stimuli.
They market it as though "artificial intelligence" means "super human reasoning", "very smart", or "capable of thought" when it's really a combination of "reacts to stimuli in a meaningful fashion" and "can appear intelligent".
-
Wait for Gen X to pop in as usual and seek attention with some "we always get ignored" bullshit.
Who cares what Gen X thinks, they have all the money.
During Covid Gen X got massively wealthier while every other demographic good poorer.
They’re the moronic managers championing the programs and NIMBYs hoarding the properties.
-
sigh
Dustin' off this one, out from the fucking meme archive...
Millenials:
Time for your third 'once-in-a-life-time major economic collapse/disaster'! Wheeee!
Gen Z:
Oh, oh dear sweet summer child, you thought Covid was bad?
Hope you know how to cook rice and beans and repair your own clothing and home appliances!
Gen A:
Time to attempt to learn how to think, good luck.
Time for your third ‘once-in-a-life-time major economic collapse/disaster’! Wheeee!
Wait? Third? I feel like we're past third. Has it only been three?
-
Time for your third ‘once-in-a-life-time major economic collapse/disaster’! Wheeee!
Wait? Third? I feel like we're past third. Has it only been three?
Dot com bubble, the great recession, covid. So yeah, that would be the fourth coming up.
-
Who could have ever possibly guessed that spending billions of dollars on fancy autocorrect was a stupid fucking idea
Fancy autocorrect? Bro lives in 2022
EDIT: For the ignorant: AI has been in rapid development for the past 3 years. For those who are unaware, it can also now generate images and videos, so calling it autocorrect is factually wrong. There are still people here who base their knowledge on 2022 AIs and constantly say ignorant stuff like "they can't reason", while geniuses out there are doing stuff like this: https://xcancel.com/ErnestRyu/status/1958408925864403068
-
Fancy autocorrect? Bro lives in 2022
EDIT: For the ignorant: AI has been in rapid development for the past 3 years. For those who are unaware, it can also now generate images and videos, so calling it autocorrect is factually wrong. There are still people here who base their knowledge on 2022 AIs and constantly say ignorant stuff like "they can't reason", while geniuses out there are doing stuff like this: https://xcancel.com/ErnestRyu/status/1958408925864403068
This comment, summarising the author's own admission, shows AI can't reason:
this new result was just a matter of search and permutation and not discovery of new mathematics.
-
This feels like such a double head fake. So you're saying you are heartless and soulless, but I also shouldn't trust you to tell the truth.
I think it was just summarising the article, not giving an "opinion".
