AI Megathread
-
@Pavel said in AI Megathread:
@Third-Eye Agreed. I recall reading somewhere that an AI program could detect the very, very, very early stages of some kinds of cancers far more quickly and consistently than a human. That’s the sort of thing AI should be used for, not art.
There is research like that in the medical spaces, but that’s not the GenAI that this thread is complaining about. Those are specialized machine learning algorithms. “AI” is such an overbroad term, it’s like saying “the internet” and encompassing everything from 4chan to AP News.
@Third-Eye said in AI Megathread:
That’s not driving advertising dollars and making anyone’s money. ChatGPT does…somehow…
Actually, ChatGPT and most of the other GenAI platforms are a huge money pit. Ed Zitron writes about this a lot (example). The investors keep buying the hype that it’ll do a vague something revolutionary someday.
-
@Faraday said in AI Megathread:
The investors keep buying the hype that it’ll do a vague something revolutionary someday.
So if I reskin a chatgpt interface and “hire” some “researchers” I also get money?
I could claim that a Faraday is on my team when the venture capitalists ask questions…
-
@Pavel said in AI Megathread:
So if I reskin a chatgpt interface and “hire” some “researchers” I also get money?
Perhaps by complete accident, you have discovered Baby’s First Startup!
-
@Hobbie said in AI Megathread:
@Pavel said in AI Megathread:
So if I reskin a chatgpt interface and “hire” some “researchers” I also get money?
Perhaps by complete accident, you have discovered Baby’s First Startup!
Not an accident, I’m just reading from How To Make Money by E. Holmes.
-
@Third-Eye said in AI Megathread:
wade through data and do pattern-recognition, but that’s not atm a money-maker for anyone.
This is what I do for a living.
-
@Trashcan said in AI Megathread:
What most people are expressing is the desire for transparency, to know if AI was used to create the content they are engaging with in the MU* space, and if there was more of that, I expect there would be less false accusations to go along with it.
There’s even a real-world example of this! That one Ares L&L game that used AI and was quickly called out for not disclosing it.
Game-runner of Silent Heaven, a small-town horror MU.
https://silentheaven.org -
@Third-Eye said in AI Megathread:
@MisterBoring said in AI Megathread:
Science AI model releases an open source schematic for a water powered drive system for cars that gets 450 miles to a gallon of water and can drive at freeway speeds. crickets
That’s not driving advertising dollars and making anyone’s money. ChatGPT does…somehow…
Honestly, I see a lot of promise in narrowly-tailored AI designed to wade through data and do pattern-recognition, but that’s not atm a money-maker for anyone.
This is already being done? There are many companies who use AI tools for data sorting and pattern recognition. It came out a few years ago in the public accounting space and is used for “efficiency” - we were forced to utilize these tools after the company I previously worked for dropped hundreds of thousands of dollars in creating it. When I was using it, it was more trouble than it’s worth but it’s definitely a thing.
AI is a big topic right now in business circles, specifically around data sorting. I’m not sure why you think it’s not a money maker? It’s a huge topic of conversation and it is concerning for me in particular as a CPA because eventually AI will be able to do a lot of what I currently do.
ETA because I don’t actually understand the comment. Who is it not a money-maker for anyone to? The people who design the AI and are going to make HEAPS of money implementing it in the businesses they go to? The people who are currently working in data analytics, finance and other data-driven fields who will eventually be replaced by robots? I mean damn near every day I am inundated with Linkedin requests and cold calls trying to peddle their AI-driven accounts payable programs or credit card such-and-such or financial statement reporting programs. My whole executive team was tasked with determining their AI spend for the next year. It’s a huge, big deal that could impact many, many lives.
-
@bear_necessities said in AI Megathread:
It’s a huge topic of conversation
In your circles. It’s not part of the general zeitgeist, so it’s easily missed or ignored.
90% of conversation about “AI” isn’t about anything actually useful, it’s about this generative nonsense, so it’s easy to make the assumption that that’s where 90% of the money is going.
-
@Pavel said in AI Megathread:
In your circles. It’s not part of the general zeitgeist, so it’s easily missed or ignored.
I actually can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not. The world of finance and business is not exactly my small little circle here.
-
@bear_necessities said in AI Megathread:
The world of finance and business is not exactly my small little circle here.
Many of the applications is fin/biz are using specific Machine Learning, rather than Generative AI. Whole different ballgame.
Though there certainly are some crappy GenAI uses (replacing blog post writers with shallow slop, replacing customer service agents with unhelpful bots, and the like), this is not a big profit center for anyone. OpenAI lost 5 billion last year while making only 3.7 billion in revenue. 3.7b is certainly not chump change for us normal folk, but for a megacorp like that it’s pitiful and unsustainable. In contrast, for example, Apple made 95 billion in the fourth quarter alone.
-
@Faraday said in AI Megathread:
OpenAI lost 5 billion last year while making only 3.7 billion in revenue. 3.7b is certainly not chump change for us normal folk, but for a megacorp like that it’s pitiful and unsustainable. In contrast, for example, Apple made 95 billion in the fourth quarter alone.
Not to get super nerdy here but it’s not that unusual for a company of that magnitude in early start-up phases to see significant losses, nor is looking at net loss vs gross revenue a great judge of financial performance for start-up companies. I could go into a lot of detail here but this is definitely not the place.
w/ regards to THIS CONVERSATION, it looks like I might be confusing the different AI models but it doesn’t really change the conclusion that the “Machine Learning” AI is just as harmful and will result in significant job losses. It just doesn’t impact our games. Yet, anyway, IDK one day it might.
-
@Jumpscare said in AI Megathread:
@Trashcan said in AI Megathread:
What most people are expressing is the desire for transparency, to know if AI was used to create the content they are engaging with in the MU* space, and if there was more of that, I expect there would be less false accusations to go along with it.
There’s even a real-world example of this! That one Ares L&L game that used AI and was quickly called out for not disclosing it.
This made me discover it was a hot button issue for me to disclose AI usage. Like @Third-Eye eye said up thread, the major thing for me is disclosing whether or not you have used AI, and in what ways you have used it. I could potentially get around to embracing an AI policy that allows for the possibility that players might use AI–
But I cannot embrace a policy where they don’t fucking flag that they are using AI. If it’s about blah-de-blah trust then why aren’t you fucking telling people that you are using AI. HUH. If it adds so much value to what you do, why do you hide it. HUH. Obviously if it is that good you should be able to show it. HUH!!!
Then again, the last time I REALLY saw someone use AI in a game, they were using AI to disguise their poses while they dualboxed alts and used one alt to help the other. They got caught at it. They got banned. You know who you are.
Maybe there IS something to say about AIs and people who use them and trust.
-
@bear_necessities said in AI Megathread:
Not to get super nerdy here but it’s not that unusual for a company of that magnitude in early start-up phases to see significant losses, nor is looking at net loss vs gross revenue a great judge of financial performance for start-up companies. I could go into a lot of detail here but this is definitely not the place.
That’s true, but usually companies like that have a clear plan. Uber can operate at a loss because eventually it’ll drive all the taxis out of business. Then it jacks up the prices and has a profitable monopoly. Amazon operated at a loss for a long time to cement itself as a hub so that it can make a profit on razor-thin margins at tremendous scale.
The concern that has been raised in many economic circles is that these GenAI companies don’t have a coherent plan for how to become profitable. Now sure it’s possible they’ll stumble into some amazing thing that unlocks a huge profit center. It’s just unlikely to come from replacing wikipedia with a plagiarized information source or providing second-rate chat support. Time will tell.
