I don't know they just look like some advanced chatbots to me that we had like 20 years ago except improved
> The AI effect occurs when onlookers discount the behavior of an artificial intelligence program by arguing that it is not real intelligence.
> Author Pamela McCorduck writes: "It's part of the history of the field of artificial intelligence that every time somebody figured out how to make a computer do something—play good checkers, solve simple but relatively informal problems—there was a chorus of critics to say, 'that's not thinking'." Researcher Rodney Brooks complains: "Every time we figure out a piece of it, it stops being magical; we say, 'Oh, that's just a computation.'"
At the same time, other AIs are constantly progressing at other, useful things, completely ignored by nearly everybody.
Perhaps, but with the ability to traverse the web and interface with applications, there might actually be a qualitative difference from chatbots of yore.
> At the same time, other AIs are constantly progressing at other, useful things, completely ignored by nearly everybody.
Interesting, such as what? Any examples?
> Interesting, such as what?
Factory robots, terrain traveling, object recognition, speech recognition, voice syntesis... On the symbolic side, have you looked at modern compilers and linters?
Language models should have a huge impact on search. And yes, search is a very impactful thing. But that too requires something a bit different from a chatbot. Not a complete new technology, but different applications.
I do wonder if the intelligence agencies are already deeply involved. If OpenAI is working with them training no-guardrails AIs.
I also wonder if the CCP/PLA is pushing Baidu's AI efforts, or if Baidu is working on its own and trying to avoid official attention.
I only briefly toured the AI field over 25 years ago after the prior AI winter was old news. I remember a couple epigrams heard from specialists at the time:
"AI is just advanced algorithms", which I think is a (slightly bitter, mostly pragmatic) reflection on the AI effect by people who had had to adjust their outlooks after that AI winter.
"Play syntactic games, win syntactic prizes", which I think was meant to remind one of the ever-present ELIZA effect.
My biggest worry about this current AI hype cycle is for how it will be marketed with the same kind of obfuscation the Web 2.0 and after user-driven content distribution systems. I'm afraid most consumers do not understand how much smoke and mirrors is involved in making products seem smarter and more authoritative than they actually are. How users themselves subconsciously cover real gaps in the correctness or completeness of the products and put more faith in them than is really warranted.
I've heard this sentiment before from a few people over the last few days, and they changed their tune very quickly once they actually looked into it.
50% of software engineers unemployed in 2 years, 5 years, 10 years?
Or something like 50% of the US/world population using a chat-gpt style assistant to perform a complicated mental task (aka not "Alexa, set a 2 minute timer.") once a day/week in 2 years, 5, 10?
Don't get me wrong, chatGPT's emergent intelligence is impressive and I'm playing with Alpaca 13B and other models locally, but I'm not sure it's going to be as transformative and as quickly as many here seem to think. Humans and society are inherently resistant to and slow to change.
And yet it blows everything before it out of the water.
It's literally a Chinese Room. (Unless you speak Mandarin?)