trention

Self-driving cars have already been not ready for prime time for 15 years and they have at least 5 more years in this state.

>Majority of peoples time is spent in digital worlds

That's just the bias for people in your bubble, the majority of the population of this planet spends its time overwhelmingly in the real world. Calling it "digital worlds" is also a big indication of tech bro bias.

How much money are you willing to bet that there would be an AI producing working clothing designs from prompts in 1 year? If it's less than your yearly salary, even you don't believe this crap.

Huggingface doesn't have a revenue of even close to a billion dollars.

The latter is a subset of the former in BLS statistics and I am using the larger category only because BLS apparently only started counting Radiologists as a separate subcategory in 2019.

>Yes, I don't understand an elementary distinction between terms that anybody with a dictionary understands

Yes, you actually don't understand them. Which is why you said this

>the global market of offering a speech-to-text API is valued at 1.3 billion dollars in 2019

which is about revenue when you previously were talking about profits. It's obvious who is the insecure one in this exchange.

>I used games as examples just because they are the easiest to understand and most popular applications of RL

No, you used it in exactly this context:

" >How significant are these top 3 things?

They generate billions of dollars of profit "

and the claim was incorrect regarding example 1.

I also don't think you understand what profit is and the difference between profit and revenue. Regardless, this exchange has become pretty pointless.

>are producing massive amounts of value

Point me to a single DL-exclusive company that has an annual turnover of >1 billion dollars and is profitable.

>They generate billions of dollars of profit

Number 1 has probably generated ~0$ in profits. It's not immediately clear that number 3, when weighting its contribution apart from everything else in the products it's integrated in, has reached 10-digits in $ profits.

So you're only left with number 2.

>can't extrapolate a trend a few years into the future

It's better to not extrapolate S-curves into exponential functions when you don't know what you are talking about, yes. A good advice for both DL researchers and "techno-optimists" who haven't seen unsubstantiated hype they didn't jump on yet.

The "radiology stuff" is not happening. Data from BLS (https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm)

Employed Radiologic Technologists in the US:

2014 - 193,400

2021 - 216,380

The growth is larger than the overall population growth in the same period. And that is in a very outsourceable occupation.

I am pretty sure no "prophylactic" to stagger the effect was possible at all. Who has ever heard of replacing parts prior to them hitting their "shelf life"?

>Europe's already in recession.

Funnily enough, if we look at the most dumb recession criterion (2 consequent quarters of negative growth), the EU is definitely not in a recession while the US is.

Let's not beat around the bush. Those directly responsible are mostly pretty much everyone who has "smelled" power in CDU and SPD in the last 2 decades. Second place goes to those responsible for nuclear mismanagement in France. It takes a lot of negative talent to have more than half of your nuclear reactors have corrosion problems at the same time.

By that logic, a google image search + sharing results you like is also art. But it really isn't. At best it's curation.

I am not sure it will be possible to get enough training data that way.

I don't know enough about diffusion models but if LLMs (of current size) have to use only public domain, they will be undertrained and we will see significant degradation in performance. Not to mention that Codex will be effectively dead.

>dall-e provides good enough results at zero cost

Even the direct costs of using OpenAI APIs are not zero.

This doesn't contradict anything I have written. The average technical user will be unable to train this exact model (not to mention the supposed future more powerful ones) in their basement in this decade.

My position is perfectly logically consistent. Art is distilled human experience and human emotions emerging in a particular context after a chain of events. None of this is true of AI "art".

What is not logically consistent is to claim that a black box utilizing statistical relationships between pixels in a giant dataset is an "artist" and that its products create "value".

The compiler is not a programmer, AI can never be an artist.

You are getting ridiculous now. Training this on "Taobao product photos" will lead to a useless model that is unable to produce practically all of the "cool" demos posted here in the last week.

Art is for the sake of humans producing said art. I don't give a flying f*ck about "art" (it's not art) generated by a neural net using statistical patterns.

If you forbid it, the investment in developing those models disappears. They will be stuck at ~what we have now at best.

You can also require cloud providers to enforce a ban on training (and deploying) such models, it's doable. Good luck training it in your basement, it will probably take you a decade.

If this is banned, it will become a lot like piracy - yes, it's available, no, most people (at least in the West) don't do it, practically no businesses do it.

Even if that's true (which it isn't), it doesn't matter. It's absolutely logically consistent to allow humans to do it while forbidding AI to do it.

I actually have zero problems with that happening. Also, your opinion of your own ability to use sarcasm successfully is at the very least highly suspect.

>I’ll hold off declaring it dead till it is well and truly dead.

The classical Moore's law formulation has been dead for 15 years already. What we have now is whataboutism about why it still holds.

The fair use argument will probably get scraped when the case gets to an EU court. Then no mimicking will be legal.

It really isn't. Most people don't consider farming murder and do not care about the well-being of non-cute, non-immediately present animals at all.

This is of course not true (for ports in particular the writing had been on the wall for more than a decade) but even if it were, there eventually were other jobs. There won't be this time around.

Those "generations of laborers" had the option to earn more for less (and less dangerous) work most of the time. It doesn't seem this will be the case now.

>There is so much doomsay around these image generation AIs and I don't really understand it. Did photographs devalue painters? Did digital art devalue painters? Did movies devalue theater? Did YouTube videos devalue cinematographers? Did Twitch streams or TikTok videos devalue YouTubers?

All of those are tools which did not lead to potentially the same final product produced for a miniature fraction of the labor costs.

AI composition is generally pretty shit. If (more like when) it becomes better, we will be having the exact same argument regarding composers.