362
Mainstream News Anchors Now Talking About the AI Bubble Bursting at Any Moment: "I think the entire AI boom is investing in the wrong future." (futurism.com)
submitted 4 weeks ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
131 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 41 points 4 weeks ago (14 children)

There is this insane amount of investment in AI built around LLMs that threatens the entire world. People worry about the bubble bursting but think AI is the ant’s pants without considering that the LLM is a dead end. None of the AI companies are going to achieve Artificial Intelligence. That’s why they will actually implode, their systems aren’t intelligent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 4 weeks ago

    I mean, they are artificial intelligence by pretty much any normal definition of that term. So is Battle Chess from the 1980s. So is bank fraud detection. So is Conway's Game of Life in its most basic definition.

    Will they develop "super intelligence", etc? No

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 4 weeks ago (9 children)

    It wont be a real AI, but itll be just enough to kill off a lot of the software industry.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 weeks ago* (7 children)

    I'm genuinely curious what "real AI" is to you?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

    Real ai to me would mean true agency. And an entity which has its own goals and relationship to its world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 weeks ago

    Yeah. I wonder if it might be difficult to identify something that reaches that point? I suppose genuine creativity might be an indication of intelligence? Or a desire to reprogram itself? I dunno, I've recently read Peter Watts blindsight and it kind of made me reconsider the relationship between consciousness and intelligence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 weeks ago

    I think you're conflating consciousness and intelligence. I think you could theoretically have an artificial general intelligence on the same level of intelligence as a human, or even beyond, but with zero consciousness. We know that intelligence does not follow consciousness (unless you believe a fish or a cow is not conscious). Why should consciousness follow intelligence?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

    A true Turing Machine, obviously

    One that when given input will give the correct output, every time, without fault or stalling, in a timeframe that is quick

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    A Turing machine has nothing to do with AI. Pretty much any computer today can emulate one, the only thing lacking is infinite memory.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 weeks ago

    Isn't there a difference between Turing Complete and Turing Machine?

    I thought many machine can be Turing Complete (when given infinite resources, can give any required output), but a Turing Machine is one that is complete?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 4 weeks ago

    I think that's the wrong conclusion. I agree they won't achieve actual intelligence, but I see no reason why that would make them implode. Current tech is still going to be something companies pay a lot for.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent