• CeeBee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    But “AI” is the umbrella term for all of them. What you said is the equivalent of saying:

    we really need to stop calling things “vehicles”. There’s cars, trucks, airplanes, submarines, and space shuttles and they’ve all been called vehicles, but functionally they have almost nothing to do with each other

    All of the things you’ve mentioned are correctly referred to as AI, and since most people do not understand the nuances of neural networks vs hard coded algorithms (and anything in-between), AI is an acceptable term for something that demonstrates results that comes about from a computer “thinking” and making shaved intelligent decisions.

    Btw, just about every image recognition system out there is a neural network itself or has a neural network in the processing chain.

    Edit: fixed an autocorrect typo

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      44
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No. No AI is NOT the umbrella term for all of them.

      No computer scientist will ever genuinely call basic algorithmic tasks “AI”. Stop saying things you literally do not know.

      We are not talking about what what the word means to normies colloquially. We’re talking about what it actually means. The entire point it is a separate term from those other things.

      Engineers would REALLY appreciate it if marketing morons would stop misapplying terminology just to make something sound cooler… NONE of those things are “AI”. That’s the fucking point. Marketing gimmicks should not get to choose our terms. (as much as they still do)

      If I pull up to your house on a bicycle and tell you, “quickly, get in my vehicle so I can drive us to the store.” You SHOULD look at that person weirdly: They’re treating a bicycle like it’s a car capable of getting on the freeway with passengers.

      • no banana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What I’ve learned as a huge nerd is that people will take a term and use it as an umbrella term for shit and they’re always incorrect but there’s never any point in correcting the use because that’s the way the collective has decided words work and it’s how they will work.

        Now the collective has decided that AI is an umbrella term for executing “more complex tasks” which we cannot understand the technical workings of but need to get done.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sometimes, but there are many cases where the nerds win. Like with technology. How many times do we hear old people misuse terms because they don’t care about the difference just for some young person to laugh and make fun of their lack of perspective?

          I’ve seen it quite a lot, and I have full confidance it will happen here so long as an actual generalized intelligence comes along to show everyone the HUGE difference every nerd talks about.

          • lad@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            But it will be called something different so almost nobody will notice that they now should see the difference

        • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is in fact how common language works, and also how jargon develops. No one in this thread outside of the specific people pointing out the problem cares what it is beyond the colloquial use, keep jargon to the in group, or you’ll just alienate the out-group and your entire point will be missed.

      • misophist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        No computer scientist will ever genuinely call basic algorithmic tasks “AI”. Stop saying things you literally do not know.

        Speak for yourself. Many of us fought that battle literally years ago and then accepted reality and moved on with our lives. Show me an actual computer scientist still hung up on this little bit of not-so-new-anymore language and I’ll show you a dying curmudgeon who has let the world pass them by. We frequently use AI to refer to these technologies that we have today and we’ve started to use more descriptive language such as post-singularity AI or Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).

        • JDubbleu@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hard agree. I don’t consider myself a “computer scientist”, but I do have a CS degree. The public use of AI is so far gone it’s just what it is now. I still wouldn’t consider path finding AI, but when you say an AI image creator, or AI chat bot it gets the point across well enough since we all know what is meant.

      • yokonzo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Calm down , language is fluid, you may not like it, but if enough people start using it as an umbrella term, that is what it’s colloquially and eventually officially going to be soon. You can’t expect to have such hard set rules this early on in the technology, it’s foolish

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          OP was not only speaking about “AI”. You are strawmanning what I said in order to be correct.

      • TheBlackLounge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        To be fair, AI was coined to mean programs written in LISP and it changes every time new techniques are developed. It’s definitely just a marketing term, but for grant money.

      • Klear@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We are not talking about what what the word means to normies colloquially. We’re talking about what it actually means.

        They are the same picture.

      • Confused_Emus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, and these days “literally” means “figuratively” whether I like it or not. Find a different hill to die on.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That is completely and utterly a separate issue. These aren’t words being changed over time. These are words being directly misapplied by morons, NOT for any ironic effect.

          People mean it when they “misuse” literally. People who misuse AI don’t know what AI is. This is a technical term being misused. Not a normal word being redefined.

          For a different word, “narcissism” DOES NOT magically mean, “a mean person” just because morons misuse a technical term. Stop being a piece of shit that wants to sound smart and start using terms correctly or not at all.

          • Confused_Emus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I just think you seem way more angry about this than you should be. It’s not really something to pop a blood vessel over. And “literally” becoming “figuratively” was also because of the misuse by morons. The fact one is a technical term is irrelevant. The not-as-educated masses water down language, particularly “technical” language because of course the general public aren’t going to know the nuances. But it’s not like most of them are talking about any of this stuff on a level where those nuances matter. Referring to the general field of “computers kinda thinking like people” as AI gets the point across for them, and it’s not hurting you. So chill.

          • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re describing jargon vs colloquial use. If you’re talking to your engineer buddy, yeah, use the terms properly or be prepared to offer clarification, because in that context it’s pretty important. If you’re talking to a psychiatrist, same thing for narcissist.

            When it comes to general public, people will use words however they’re most commonly used, and that’s perfectly fine. The average person doesn’t know, can’t be expected to learn, and has no use for knowing the definition of jargon that’s outside of their day-to-day use.

            If the use of colloquial terms is causing you or someone else confusion or losing clarity, ask clarifying questions. That’s how professionals or just more knowledgeable people on the subject in general, have had to interface with the average person for like… How long have we had language?

      • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re talking in a forum to a bunch of normies using words colloquially, or to a bunch of media buffoons who report to nornies who are familiar with colloquial terms. I get your point if you’re talking to engineers, but you’re not

      • Pat_Riot@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s just like your opinion, man - The Dude

        You’re smart right? So, who’s there more of, normies or computer scientists? Just make the tech, if that really is what you do, but marketing and the masses are always going to decide what we call stuff not some cartoonist engineer.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Uhhhh who do you think defines these specialized words in the first place? Not normies. That is the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard, thanks for the laugh.

          • Pat_Riot@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m pleased you are entertained. But being correct doesn’t make you any less wrong. I’m sorry that you don’t understand how language works. Now go build us some more toys.

          • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            In general conversation? The people there are more of define it lol. In a professional setting yeah, be specific, but… Wait, where are we? Oh the fucking comments section on lemmy. Pretty much the exact opposite of a professional setting. Use the words how the people around you are using it, or you’ll be misunderstood and have to explain yourself.

    • benignintervention@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      While this is true, I think of AI in the sci fi sense of a programmed machine intelligence rivaling human problem solving, communication, and opinion forming. Everything else to me is ML.

      But like Turing thought, how can we really tell the difference

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Turing’s question wasn’t a philosophical one. It was a literal one, that he tried to answer.

        What the person said is NOT true. Nobody like Turing would EVER call those things AI, because they are very specifically NOT any form of “intelligence”. Fooling a layman in to mislabeling something is not the same as developing the actual thing that’d pass a Turing test.

      • CeeBee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        What you’re referring to in movies is properly known as Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).

        AI is correctly applied to systems that process in a “biologically similar” fashion. Basically something a human or “smart” animal could do. Things like object detection, natural language processing, facial recognition, etc, are things you can’t program (there’s more to facial recognition, but I’m simplifying for this discussion) and they need to be trained via a neural network. And that process is remarkably similar to how biological systems learn and work.

        Machine learning, on the other hand, are processes that are intelligent but are not intrinsically “human”. A good example is song recommendations. The more often you listen to a genre of music, the more likely you are to enjoy other songs in that genre. So a system can count the number of songs you listen to the most in a specific genre, and then recommend that genre more than others. Fairly straightforward to program and doesn’t require any training, yet it gets better the more you use it.

      • Deuces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As far as taking scifi terms for real things, at least this one is somewhat close. I’m still pissed about hover boards. And Androids are right out!

        • schmidtster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          How is my comment “gatekeeping” by any stretch of the defintion? I had one comment and the one making jest that you replied to. I only asked that there should be a catch all term and provided examples to go with it. How is that gatekeeping…?

          It’s more to due with social media tropes. Someone sees a downvoted comment and does the same without even reading.

          Edit and more proof it has nothing to do with the stuff you claimed, it’s now upvoted since the initial wave of people have stopped and people who care to read the meat of the comments now have and have established balance.

        • schmidtster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It entirely has to do with the first person who interacts with the comment.

          A downvote can be all it takes to set it down that way.

          It was more just a funny observation on the bullshit “social media” is and how people assume everything from a few words.

          Not every opinion someone has is going to be agreeable to everyone, it’s asinine to even think that.

      • CeeBee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I didn’t steal anything. When I posted my comment there were only two other comments in the whole thread.

        • schmidtster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know, it’s just funny how two very similar thoughts can be be taking two different ways deepening on who sees it first and interacts with it.