this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
151 points (93.6% liked)

Technology

59374 readers
3794 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“In 10 years, computers will be doing this a million times faster.” The head of Nvidia does not believe that there is a need to invest trillions of dollars in the production of chips for AI::Despite the fact that Nvidia is now almost the main beneficiary of the growing interest in AI, the head of the company, Jensen Huang, does not believe that

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago (27 children)

So a Cerebras wafer will be 10^6 faster for the same computation as now, for the same price, in just 10 years? Not after Moore scaling ended many years ago and neural hardware architecture has matured. You can sure go analog, but that's not the same computation. And that's the end of the line, not without true 3d integration.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 months ago (18 children)

It depends what you call AI.

True artificial intelligence likely requires quantum computing because there's some quantum stuff happening our brains and probably the smartest living human (Sir Roger Penrose) thinks that's where the secret to consciousness is hiding after spending the last couple decades investigating that after helping Hawking finish up Einstein's work

If you just mean a chat bot that can pass the Turing test, then yeah we can just wait a decade instead of developing special tech for AI.

I mean, if we really develop artificial intelligence before we understand our own consciousness, we're probably fucked anyways.

It'd be like somehow inventing a nuclear bomb before understanding what radiation was. We'd have no idea what we're creating or what the consequences of flipping the switch would be.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago (13 children)

Can we stop with this "not real AI" meme... it's a painfully dull response at this point, why does the goal post have legs? Just because Penrose thinks quantum mumbo jumbo is needed doesn't mean he is right, machine learning is completely outside his field of expertise.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

it's nice when words have meaning tho

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yes. The term AI was coined 70 years ago and specifically includes neural nets. LLMs are definitely AI. I don't know what definition people use when they say it's not.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sure, but 60 years ago they coined "machine learning" when it became clear that there was going to be more work needed to emulate intelligence

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's wrong. Machine learning is considered part of AI. AI is not necessarily about learning. EG game AI typically doesn't learn/improve.

emulate intelligence

Feel free to define intelligence and/or emulated intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

We're probably talking at crosspoints here. When people say not real AI, they usually mean not artificial general intelligence, or in many cases, not intelligent in the ways suited to the problem being addressed (e.g. ChatGPT being used out of the box as a customer service rep)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

As you said, it's nice when words have meanings.

People who say it's not real AI simply don't know what the word has meant for decades. I think people want to say that it is not an actual person or something like that. Which, of course, it isn't. I have to say, with 8 billion people on the planet, making artificial people would be the greatest waste of human effort I can imagine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Ai is a field. Using it in an appeal to "true ai" is meaningless.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)