| Dismissing the potential of the current wave of AI as overhyped because "I literally only use ChatGPT" is like someone in 1985 dismissing computers as overhyped because "I literally only use WordPerfect". You're missing out on what all the other computers are being used for. The current wave of model development, sharing, and fine-tuning is creating a technical ecosystem that supports making computer programs that are able to interact with unstructured data in ways that historically have been impossible. That most people have only seen that used to make a chatbot that can answer unstructured questions with unstructured and occasionally hallucinated answers says nothing about the profound ways those capabilities will shift what kinds of problems we point computers at in the future. Let's take a classic cataloging problem like managing a small library inventory. Say you're a software company and you have a few bookshelves of programming books people can borrow. And you want to make it possible for people to search the list of books you have in stock to see if there's something they want to borrow before they walk down. This is classic Web 1.0 stuff - a mySQL database with a books table and an authors table, indulge your third normal form fetish. And maybe you integrate with an ISBN catalog by sending it nicely structured XML queries so you can use a scanner to scan the barcodes, pull down and transform structured data about each book, and use it to populate your database. Make an old school HTML form to search it by title, author, publisher, date, etc... Nowadays, you can take a picture of the spines on the shelves; ask a multimodal AI to figure out what books that means you've got; feed that, plus plain text search access to an online catalog, to another model to get it to build a nice big document describing all the books; feed that as context into a chatbot librarian and let it help users find books. Set up a webcam pointing at the shelf and periodically take new pictures to keep track of who took what books. Think about the massive amounts of efforts businesses go to to create information technology systems to structure the state of their business, interactions among their employees, data about their customers and suppliers, integration with external systems, and to schematize and constrain the processes of their business. And now start to think about how that all changes when I can skip the structure part. We are not yet used to thinking about how to solve problems with computers that don't need their inputs to be rigorously structured. When we start realizing what that means, we're in a different game entirely. |
I'm just not quite sure I buy this. It feels to me like there's a light motte-and-bailey going on, where supposedly AI is going to be a paradigm shift that changes the very notion of what's possible, but the actual proposals are mostly about LLMs being a finite-multiplier enhancement for the existing ability of software to model and optimize processes.
In particular, a big fraction of the concrete proposals seem to be about making business processes more efficient. Are businesses generally constrained by this to begin with? Like businesses don't seem to be sprinting at the edge of software technology to get as much efficiency as they can, buying diminishing returns from existing tech and waiting eagerly for the next wave of improvements. Judging by revealed preferences, it just doesn't seem like a very high priority for them.
Taking your automated library example, that sounds very cool from a hacker/tinkerer perspective and I'm sure it would result in some efficiency improvements, but it just doesn't seem like, no offense to anyone, a problem that needs urgent attention. How does this significantly improve the situation for anyone involved?
Of course it's true that we don't know what we don't know, and I don't disagree that often technology changes the world in unpredictable ways or even that current AI could possibly lead to this. At risk of being the dropbox-is-just-rsync guy, I'm just skeptical about the following pattern:
(1) some new tech gets invented that's supposedly the next internet;
(2) no one can quite explain or plausibly hypothesize how; but
(3) in the meantime, a wave of companies start building "platforms" and selling shovels to people who will supposedly later build the actual useful thing.