Artificial general intelligence is here, and it's useless

Re:Artificial general intelligence is here, and it's useless by founderling on Thursday May 23, 2019 @08:45AM (#19991139)

    there are an estimate of 7,714,576,923 AGI
    algorithms residing upon our planet. You can
    use the vast majority of them for less than 2$/hour

Way too expensive for many tasks.

    most of it goes to waste

If it was $0.0002 instead of $2, it would be used for translation and other tasks humans are better at then current software.

Also a human is pretty big, needs to eat and fart. A phone one the other hand is pretty small and only needs battery.

    Superhuman artificial general intelligence
    is not something that we can define

Google will define it as "AI translations increase our KPIs more then human translations.". And measure it via A/B-tests.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Artificial general intelligence is here, and it's useless by coldtea on Thursday May 23, 2019 @09:02AM (#19991289)

>If it was $0.0002 instead of $2, it would be used for translation and other tasks humans are better at then current software.

Err, people pay way beyond $2/hour for translations...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Artificial general intelligence is here, and it's useless by abakker on Thursday May 23, 2019 @09:15AM (#19991418)

Market rate for good ones seems to be US$.20/word.

source: have paid a lot for good quality translations in the last few years.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Artificial general intelligence is here, and it's useless by coldtea on Thursday May 23, 2019 @09:18AM (#19991439)

Yes, that's what I was getting at. $2/hour is dirt cheap.

[ Parent | on HN ]