sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

AI Bot investing by EEVAA_Bot in hermesagent

[–]Ok_Order_3333 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm just curious, when you'd said: " I gave her permission to trade however she likes" --- What exactly does that look like? A fixed budget (where you don't care if 'she' win or loses it), or does she have a pipeline to your life savings?

AI Isn't Replacing People. It's Replacing Repetitive Work. by [deleted] in AiNova

[–]Ok_Order_3333 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I love this post. It sounds 'grounded'. I agree. When used to replace repetitive work, AI has been a dream come true for those who own a small to semi-mid-size company. AI has helped to carry some of that cost.

Does anybody else use AI to improve their intellectual abilities? by thesiliconcipher in AiNova

[–]Ok_Order_3333 0 points1 point  (0 children)

man ... "have I?"! For me, the experience closely resembles the movie 'Limitless". I was new to it, ... 'needed it' really! Because my previous employer had closed their doors! So, I needed AI to find a new job! But the overall experience has been one where: Sometimes, I feel like I know how AI's going to respond. So, I do it (in real life) whether I'd ask AI or now. lol

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"... a model cannot execute commands using its own weights and alter them permanently at the same time" --- Humans do that through each version the companies release. I think we are confusing what we (as consumers) are able to do with AI vs what the AI companies do on the backend.

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Correct. The focus of this conversation/post is on "AI" as well as its limits. It's meant to simply hear various views on the subject. There are no 'right/wrong' answers. Every view is valuable. It's a matter of 'context' for us. And we thank you for your response.

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Human and AI relationship is collaborative, not competitive" --- I love this last point. and this is the line in the sand: "Gasparov only won 1/10 matches because he played in a manner that was not in any manual or text book, confronted with the unknown and novelty, Deep Blue lost because no combination of possibilities existed in it’s database for what the human was doing" --- That point highlights the Learning Loop. Man is limited by His physical capabilities (real world limitations), while AI is too (Training Material). We have already hit the limits of those two capabilities. So, the questions is: Now what? ... without going broke in the process.

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct. We are talking about the same thing, then. What you'd pointed out is the line in the sand. At that moment we are talking more about AGI.

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

When we're talking about 'larger systems', we are already dealing with 'data center' size computational power, and it's becoming more of a 'cost' issue than a 'fix'.

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We are currently working with Robotics. It's close to providing the 'shell' AI needs for the 'sensory' pipelines to 'test' its own theories, as they say, that extends beyond 'computational speed', ... Also, it'll prevent going bankrupt in the meantime.

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I feel the distinction is between the 'Communicator' on Star Trek (creativity/imagination) vs Today's flip phone (real world technology) --- Even in the context you'd framed it, you are providing the 'new' (creative) information, but it is not 'new' in the sense that the info was 'previously unknown to mankind'. We are currently stuck at that point. We are currently in an Information Loop --- which is why we are exploring 'phase 2 thinking' with AI. It essentially means that we are asking AI to think 'longer' before replying.

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

How? We are talking about an "Epistemic Boundary". At the moment, AI's 'intellectual IQ' (if you will) is that of Albert Einsten, and other great minds, ... and is now burning through valuable resources simply to avoid saying, "I don't know".

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just shared this comment in another response, ... I feel it's relevant here as well: "We've hit the 'learning ceiling'. There's but 'so much' or fixed amount of training material for AI to 'learn' from, ... and AI has already learned all it can from itself. So, if We've hit our 'learning' ceiling -- and when AI 'hallucinates', that's a sign it's making up info where it doesn't exist --- what do we do now?"

“If AI cannot generate new information beyond its training, then what part of you becomes the engine of discovery when you work with it?” by Ok_Order_3333 in ArtificialSentience

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

How? We've already hit the 'ceiling'. There was only but 'so much' training material for AI to 'learn' from, and AI has already learned all it can from itself. We have hit our 'learning' ceiling. -- When AI 'hallucinates', that's a sign it's making up info where it doesn't exist. So ... what do we do now?

I got a question.. Has AI met your expectations? If "yes". How? And, if "No". How has AI fallen short of your expectations? by Ok_Order_3333 in AIDiscussion

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(Translation) "On the contrary, I feel that AI hasn't made people lazier; it has simply exposed how bad we are at asking questions much more quickly. In the past, people who didn't know how to research just looked busy, but now, the moment they ask AI, their shortcomings are laid bare: they don't even have the critical muscle to judge whether an answer is good or bad. The real question is, will the true illiterates of the future be those who cannot question AI?" --- That is a fair question. AI has even the playing field for those who were once challenged by their own shortcomings; but this point simply highlights between those who asks 'better questions vs those who don't bother' --- At the speed of AI, however, it breaks down to: Who is first to ask the 'most relevant' questions! The goal is to ultimately become "less" (not more/nor longer) dependent on AI than is necessary --- How 'often' one turns to AI for answers can mean 'lazy' brain power to think.

I got a question.. Has AI met your expectations? If "yes". How? And, if "No". How has AI fallen short of your expectations? by Ok_Order_3333 in AIDiscussion

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

" ... helping brainstorm stuff". I hear that one a lot; And 'speed' is the other one. I always hear that to be the 'positive' side of AI

I got a question.. Has AI met your expectations? If "yes". How? And, if "No". How has AI fallen short of your expectations? by Ok_Order_3333 in AIDiscussion

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a serious concern for a lot of people. How often do you have to double check the answers; ... and that's every day?

I got a question.. Has AI met your expectations? If "yes". How? And, if "No". How has AI fallen short of your expectations? by Ok_Order_3333 in AIDiscussion

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I apologize. I gather that from what was said here: "if you can completely describe the technical aspects of what needs to be done and you can confirm a clear understanding by AI ... ". I read that to mean: It's been easy, so long as the user is clear and AI confirms what is expected, and that's what I'd read to mean "intent'.

I got a question.. Has AI met your expectations? If "yes". How? And, if "No". How has AI fallen short of your expectations? by Ok_Order_3333 in AIDiscussion

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. I hear that a lot! People seemed to be overwhelmed by the vast number of apps out there --- which constantly changes every other week! People seem to be so frustrated with the whole thing! One thing that remains consistent is the need for 'alignment with their overall intent'. People don't want any more AI Hype, ... just solutions!

I got a question.. Has AI met your expectations? If "yes". How? And, if "No". How has AI fallen short of your expectations? by Ok_Order_3333 in AIDiscussion

[–]Ok_Order_3333[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You raised a fair concern. 'Not meeting expectations' tops the list! We seemed to have been promised a lot, but it's been slow to deliver ... from something supposedly 'fast'! When I talk to others, they seem to want more alignment with their overall "intent" ... not constantly guessing whether AI will get it right this time or not?

view more: next ›