What benefits have we gained from generative AI (really ML) that currently outweigh the cost of researching developing, and running them? Or do we stick with an expected value based on what generative AI may be able to do and the next step technologies that come after it?
The article is making pretty clear arguments for costs of generative AI, and raising the author's opinion that it isn't worth it. Just claiming it is in fact worth it without anything to support that isn't super helpful.
Last November, DeepMind released the results of a generative AI model that created theoretical molecular structures for over 2 million undiscovered synthetic materials. Within days, materials science researchers were able to confirm 700 of them. The sheer number of these new potential materials discovered is greater than has been created in the rest of human history combined. These are materials that can be used in manufacturing, energy production, and other objectives that are critical not just for advancing human society, but avoiding the impending crisis we are already facing.
Similar AI endeavors have been underway for medicine and human health.
The author is making extremely shallow, flawed arguments that hinge on an ignorant (or possibly, deliberately narrow-minded) understanding of what generative AI is, how it is already being used, and the magnitude of what is already being achieved with it.
It will be interesting to see how many of those, if any, pan out to have a meaningful use at scale. If I remember right, those 700 or so were synthesized in a lab but I don't think we know much beyond that.
We'll see if any of them end up being viable as far as manufacturing and material availability go, and whether they're better replacements for existing tech like batteries. The hope is that we'll have Jarvis inventing a new material for Iron Man's suit, but we could always end up with an endless pile of technically feasible but functionally useless materials.
A few billion moderately interesting images, and a collection of slightly weird nearly-free marginal cost interns who studied literally every subject but somehow still only act like freshly minted graduates with no real-world experience.
With EVs the focus becomes how wonderful they are because they do not burn fossil fuels in their engines. Great, but what about what all the other issues (including non renewable issues in the rest of the supply chain involved in building the EV)? They're greenwashed away - no need to discuss public transit and densification. EVs will fix everything and we don't need to change our life on any significant way.
They are a way to continue going down the wrong path and feel good about it.
it's a not a waste of time but imo it's also not going to be disrupting. it could be a good sounding board when you know the subject otherwise it's mostly useless. it does makes things convenient but how much value it add, that's yet to be seen.
The article is making pretty clear arguments for costs of generative AI, and raising the author's opinion that it isn't worth it. Just claiming it is in fact worth it without anything to support that isn't super helpful.