What I see now has several issues. One I fear is a thing called fidelity. Like humans passing some massage on through a chain people only worse. No machine will recognize that the message got lost, along the way. Right now, we have no way to determine how many AI levels the information has gone through. I'm also told that it occasionally hallucinates. Not all that surprizing. They say they are working on it. Another thing that is bad, is the enormous amount of power consumed in the learning process. We already have a serious issue with finding less harmful ways of generating power. Then, what can we do with a high percentage of the current younger generation thinking the earth is flat. Computer generated AI should fit right in. Dwight
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Chuck Guzis via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Frank Leonhardt via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Frank Leonhardt via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? ben via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Frank Leonhardt via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Frank Leonhardt via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Adrian Godwin via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? ben via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Frank Leonhardt via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? ben via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? dwight via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Alexander Schreiber via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Alexander Schreiber via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? ben via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Paul Koning via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? ben via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? roger arrick via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Fred Cisin via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Will Cooke via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? Fred Cisin via cctalk
- [cctalk] Re: AI? Really? David Wade via cctalk