• rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Lots of AI is technologically interesting and has tons of potential, but this kind of chatbot and image/video generation stuff we got now is just dumb.

    • MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      I firmly believe we won’t get most of the interesting, “good” AI until after this current AI bubble bursts and goes down in flames. Once AI hardware is cheap interesting people will use it to make cool things. But right now, the big players in the space are drowning out anyone who might do real AI work that has potential, by throwing more and more hardware and money at LLMs and generative AI models because they don’t understand the technology and see it as a way to get rich and powerful quickly.

      • haungack@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I don’t know if the current AI phase is a bubble, but i agree with you that if it were a bubble and burst, it wouldn’t somehow stop or end AI, but cause a new wave of innovation instead.

        I’ve seen many AI opponents imply otherwise. When the dotcom bubble burst, the internet didn’t exactly die.

      • NewDayRocks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        AI is good and cheap now because businesses are funding it at a loss, so not sure what you mean here.

        The problem is that it’s cheap, so that anyone can make whatever they want and most people make low quality slop, hence why it’s not “good” in your eyes.

        Making a cheap or efficient AI doesn’t help the end user in any way.

        • MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I’m using “good” in almost a moral sense. The quality of output from LLMs and generative AI is already about as good as it can get from a technical standpoint, continuing to throw money and data at it will only result in minimal improvement.

          What I mean by “good AI” is the potential of new types of AI models to be trained for things like diagnosing cancer, and and other predictive tasks that we haven’t thought of yet that actually have the potential to help humanity (and not just put artists and authors out of their jobs).

          The work of training new, useful AI models is going to be done by scientists and researchers, probably on a limited budgets because there won’t be a clear profit motive, and they won’t be able to afford thousands of $20,000 GPUs like are being thrown at LLMs and generative AI today. But as the current AI race crashes and burns, the used hardware of today will be more affordable and hopefully actually get used for useful AI projects.

          • NewDayRocks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Ok. Thanks for clarifying.

            Although I am pretty sure AI is already used in the medical field for research and diagnosis. This “AI everywhere” trend you are seeing is the result of everyone trying to stick and use AI in every which way.

            The thing about the AI boom is that lots of money is being invested into all fields. A bubble pop would result in investment money drying up everywhere, not make access to AI more affordable as you are suggesting.

        • SolarBoy@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 hours ago

          It appears good and cheap. But it’s actually burning money, energy and water like crazy. I think somebody mentioned to generate a 10 second video, it’s the equivalent in energy consumption as driving a bike for 100km.

          It’s not sustainable. I think the thing the person above you is referring to is if we ever manage to make LLMs and such which can be run locally on a phone or laptop with good results. That would make people experiment and try out things themselves, instead of being dependent on paying monthly for some services that can change anytime.

          • krunklom@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            i mean. i have a 15 amp fuse in my apartment and a 10 second cideo takes like 10 minutes to make, i dont know how much energy a 4090 draws but anyone that has an issue with me using mine to generate a 10 second bideo better not play pc games.

          • NewDayRocks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            You and OP are misunderstanding what is meant by good and cheap.

            It’s not cheap from a resource perspective like you say. However that is irrelevant for the end user. It’s “cheap” already because it is either free or costs considerably less for the user than the cost of the resources used. OpenAI or Meta or Twitter are paying the cost. You do not need to pay for a monthly subscription to use AI.

            So the quality of the content created is not limited by cost.

            If the AI bubble popped, this won’t improve AI quality.