|
|
|
|
|
|
by WnZ39p0Dgydaz1
2384 days ago
|
|
|
There are very few "AI companies". True AI companies are research labs like DeepMind and those AI consultancies. Both of these make money from PR and hype. Other than that, some video/image analysis and processing companies, e.g. face recognition solutions, come to mind as exceptions. The other kind of company that depends on the recent AI developments is infra. They are selling the "shovels" for others to buy into the hype. Other companies that brand themselves as AI do so for PR purposes. Most of them don't use AI, use robust techniques that have been around for many decades, or use it only to justify their pitch. Their product would be just the same with rule-based systems or without any kind of ML. |
|
|
I would add, there are some DL/ML business components which are in heavy use in some industries which given the companies size are giant productions deployments of "IA" (not expert systems or other automation technologies), so you could say we are actually living somehow in the principle of a golden age of "IA" (DL/ML techniques), but DL/ML techniques - at least what is known publicly to be the state of the art - has some practical limits (i.e. power consumption to traing useful models), but workarounds for those limits are being heavyly studied or solutions are being tested (as we speak indeed).
What's here for sure, it's a golden age of data: you can extract (meta)data from almost everything running on a CPU/GPU, the "likes" in everything are the users training models, not exactly the models you imagine (because you can associate/correlate some scenarios - "a birthday party at the office" - with others you would think are a lot different - "a christmas party at the bar" - but they'are not so different actually, and the features found by the training are more or less - it should be a % - interchangeable.
So yeah, every "like" out there is training something behind the scene.