Surface level high intensity PR 'events' and 'claims' drive big capital and techno-optimism, but it's starting to look like the crypto scam whitepapers at this point. With the difference being a dangerous substratum involving self-propagated dev-vectors that actually do deliver services, just not with the utility that the naïve and all too often gullible have bought into, eg:
"The AI Scientist scheme doesn't sound legit for 2024. The so-called "innovative system" uses large language models (LLMs) to mimic the scientific process. It can according to the media, generate research ideas, design and execute experiments, analyze results, and even perform peer reviews of its own papers. The researchers claim that The AI Scientist can produce a complete research paper for approximately $15 in computing costs.
Considering the explosion of AI papers and academic papers in general often with ChatGPT elements, Generative AI's impact on science may not be as good as is often portrayed. Deskilling academics doing the hard work of research analysis could be problematic. A PhD candidate is expected to be performing original, independent research with the help of a supervisor and a co-supervisor. Not is all what it seems.
A lot of claims are being made in how good Generative AI is at coding and science but we need to be very careful. Sakana AI employed a technique called "model merging" which combines existing AI models to yield a new model, combining it with an approach inspired by evolution, leading to the creation of hundreds of model generations."
The money is still flooding, but watch for how finance is starting to discipline AI companies. They want return on investment and are losing patience with the wild stuff.
Surface level high intensity PR 'events' and 'claims' drive big capital and techno-optimism, but it's starting to look like the crypto scam whitepapers at this point. With the difference being a dangerous substratum involving self-propagated dev-vectors that actually do deliver services, just not with the utility that the naïve and all too often gullible have bought into, eg:
"The AI Scientist scheme doesn't sound legit for 2024. The so-called "innovative system" uses large language models (LLMs) to mimic the scientific process. It can according to the media, generate research ideas, design and execute experiments, analyze results, and even perform peer reviews of its own papers. The researchers claim that The AI Scientist can produce a complete research paper for approximately $15 in computing costs.
Considering the explosion of AI papers and academic papers in general often with ChatGPT elements, Generative AI's impact on science may not be as good as is often portrayed. Deskilling academics doing the hard work of research analysis could be problematic. A PhD candidate is expected to be performing original, independent research with the help of a supervisor and a co-supervisor. Not is all what it seems.
A lot of claims are being made in how good Generative AI is at coding and science but we need to be very careful. Sakana AI employed a technique called "model merging" which combines existing AI models to yield a new model, combining it with an approach inspired by evolution, leading to the creation of hundreds of model generations."
https://www.readfuturist.com/what-is-the-ceiling-for-nvidia-backed-japan-based-sakana-ai-sakana/
A very good set of cautions.
The money is still flooding, but watch for how finance is starting to discipline AI companies. They want return on investment and are losing patience with the wild stuff.
Just posted about Sakana.ai today.