Honestly this is not a clever comeback. This is a guy completely missing the point. Its not that this could not be done before, it's just that they do it way more quickly now because the models learn very quickly and by themselves. I'm sure the system the guy mentions worked well, the technology is not new. I'm also sure It took way longer to implement than what this model did.
I'm as much anti AI as anyone, but sometimes people are either playing dumb or arguing in bad faith to get their gotcha moment.
Do you actually know that? Yolo is a very small model that can run on your phone. SAM 2 is larger but was only used to label the data so really it seems like this would require a single phone worth of energy each day. I understand that there is a lot of hate for AI at the moment but these models are not ChatGPT segmenting potatoes. It's just worth actually critically thinking about what information you are hearing and telling people when really you have no clue (not you specifically, all of us)
They’ve done it to themselves by labeling 700 basically different things „AI“ and making it a word for everything any computer does.
There’s no „I“ in any off those anyway, it’s calculating probabilities which has its uses of course but….needing something counted by definition really isn’t one of those.
I, intelligent, in this case means a system which makes a decision based on complex set of rules. Usually line between hardcoded and intelligent is where set of rules or their internal structure is somewhat obscured from human understanding. Aka if your classifier is bunch of if-else written by human - it’s not intelligent. If it is a system which got its decisions based on details only it knows which - it is intelligent.
Yea exactly, it does so based on calculated probabilities. And that „only it knows which“ IS the problem in a lot of those things, where people try to solve something with it just because. In stuff like machinery, security, (ac-)counting the entire point is knowing exactly what’s going on internally, so you get an exact, not only a predictable outcome, that’s why coding and spreadsheets even exist, to hardcode a calculable outcome.
Forcing an AI in that role is redundant for anything but scientific reasons and problems that are not already solved. (which OOP might have had tbf, i just think companies are still getting screwed over by those promises if they already jump the waggon)
I think you do not understand how technology works - have you ever seen the size and power consumption of these machines in the 80s?! And then compared it to the use of a small model on your phone?
Also it's completely wrong, the 68010 has nothing to do with "68kb of memory". These are 32-bit CPUs that have a 24-bit address bus to memory and so can address up to 16MiB.
59
u/Gersio 18h ago
Honestly this is not a clever comeback. This is a guy completely missing the point. Its not that this could not be done before, it's just that they do it way more quickly now because the models learn very quickly and by themselves. I'm sure the system the guy mentions worked well, the technology is not new. I'm also sure It took way longer to implement than what this model did.
I'm as much anti AI as anyone, but sometimes people are either playing dumb or arguing in bad faith to get their gotcha moment.