As someone in the know i agree, but for the “common folk” out there with a very limited tech background, it’s probably the easiest way to get the point what was used across.
No it’s just straight up lazy and leading people to believe ChatGPT is out there solving archeological problems and is actually valuable. Just call it machine learning and go. Most non tech people won’t care, and they won’t keep having that association reinforced.
You’ve got a point there, i did not take into account that this reinforces the perception of LLMs as something close to AGI (which was pushed heavily by Altman and Amodei).
The other problem is the “um actually the field of ML is a subset of AI” people because, technically machine learning is a subset of the field of artificial intelligence mathematics.
But them acting like that isn’t doing the devil’s dirty work to “um actually” at everyone is absurd.
Without over-disclosing: I work in a highly technical field. We’ve done considerable assessment of LLMs and our conclusion so far is that they’re largely useless to us. But since long before the LLM craze, we’ve also been exploring ML applications, and some of those have been yielding interesting results.
Both are flavors of AI. It’s just that one is in a massive hype cycle right now, so correcting unreasonable expectations is a necessity.
Language needs to change because it’s completely undecipherable to lay people. I use all sorts of models to great effect in my work. Random forests, LSTMs, SVMs, etc all have tons of great uses. I am pretty anti “AI” as lay people understand it (though the technology is super cool on a technical level)
On the plus side, I can much more easily convince people to use any sort of machine learning models than I used to be able to by calling it AI.
I don’t see how using terms correctly is doing “the devils work” if anything its a useful corrective to “chat bots do all the things” to explain to people that AI is an umbrella term that includes many things.
Getting real tired of everyone calling everything AI these days. Machine learning doesn’t mean AI
As someone in the know i agree, but for the “common folk” out there with a very limited tech background, it’s probably the easiest way to get the point what was used across.
No it’s just straight up lazy and leading people to believe ChatGPT is out there solving archeological problems and is actually valuable. Just call it machine learning and go. Most non tech people won’t care, and they won’t keep having that association reinforced.
You’ve got a point there, i did not take into account that this reinforces the perception of LLMs as something close to AGI (which was pushed heavily by Altman and Amodei).
The other problem is the “um actually the field of ML is a subset of AI” people because, technically machine learning is a subset of the field of artificial intelligence mathematics.
But them acting like that isn’t doing the devil’s dirty work to “um actually” at everyone is absurd.
Without over-disclosing: I work in a highly technical field. We’ve done considerable assessment of LLMs and our conclusion so far is that they’re largely useless to us. But since long before the LLM craze, we’ve also been exploring ML applications, and some of those have been yielding interesting results.
Both are flavors of AI. It’s just that one is in a massive hype cycle right now, so correcting unreasonable expectations is a necessity.
Language needs to change because it’s completely undecipherable to lay people. I use all sorts of models to great effect in my work. Random forests, LSTMs, SVMs, etc all have tons of great uses. I am pretty anti “AI” as lay people understand it (though the technology is super cool on a technical level)
On the plus side, I can much more easily convince people to use any sort of machine learning models than I used to be able to by calling it AI.
I don’t see how using terms correctly is doing “the devils work” if anything its a useful corrective to “chat bots do all the things” to explain to people that AI is an umbrella term that includes many things.