|
|
|
|
|
|
by tekkk
2376 days ago
|
|
|
Well.. it is nice, I guess, but really dumbed down version in my opinion to actually be of practical use. Sure it's great publicity for Reaktor and Finland and whatnot, but I'm dubious of its actual benefits. Teaching basic statistics would be much more useful than "AI", but I guess it lacks the hype factor so marketing-wise it wouldn't just be as cool. It's as if there wasn't enough of snake oil salesman promoting their business as "AI-powered" already. And what AI does even mean in current context? A bag of machine learning algorithms? I always likened AI to be more of general AI rather than how it's nowadays labelled. |
|
|
I would argue against this course having no benefits. There is a huge disconnect between what the reality of the near-future in tech is and what the media mis-represent it to be, often fuelled by interviews and quotes from the people directly benefiting from stoking the fire.
The general populace being much closer to a position to understand that it's actually largely unrealistic or nonsense is the right way to go about bridging the gap between the "tech class" and your average lay person.
I definitely agree that society in general would be better if people had better grasp of statistics and how they are manipulated and mis-represented to them, but there are so many interest areas that people would be better off for having some understanding of that I don't think any one can be discredited just because it's not one of the others.