News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:On being wrong about AI by rsynnott on Thursday December 14, 2023 @06:33AM (#38640244)
> Self driving cars?

This one in particular, I find fascinating, because we've literally just _had_ a hype cycle over it (I remember people telling me they'd be here any day now a decade ago), and now we're onto another AI hype cycle, almost immediately. Which comes first, AGI, or the self-driving car? :)

(I think your other examples are qualitatively different; moon bases, supersonic (passenger) jets and asteroid mining are clearly possible, but impractical for economic reasons; no-one is willing to _pay_ for them. Plenty of people are willing to pay for both self-driving cars and AGI, but there is just no clear route to achieving either.)

Re:On being wrong about AI by jltsiren on Thursday December 14, 2023 @07:15AM (#38640540)
I think the main obstacle is that intelligence seems to be inherently unreliable.

There is no shortage of human intelligence in the world. The average person is remarkably intelligent. But they need a lot of learning and practice, and often plenty of organizational support, before they can use that intelligence to do something useful reliably.

We know how to make cars that are stupid and reliable. We know how to make cars that are intelligent and unreliable. But there is still a lot of work to be done before we can make cars that are both intelligent and reliable.

The only AI product I use in my daily work is Copilot. It can usually make useful and accurate suggestions, sometimes even remarkably so, but it also makes stupid mistakes all the time. Copilot is most useful for automating boring routine work, where I can quickly catch and correct its mistakes. It's far less useful for the difficult parts, or when I don't know what I'm doing, because the mistakes it makes are less obvious to me.

Re:On being wrong about AI by rwmj on Thursday December 14, 2023 @06:40AM (#38640290)
We have self-driving cars already, but they're not evenly distributed ... and they have an unsatisfying amount of human input behind the scenes.
Re:On being wrong about AI by rsynnott on Thursday December 14, 2023 @06:52AM (#38640381)
Well, I mean, if you're willing to stretch the definition to beyond breaking, sure, but we don't have anything that the average person in the street would think of as a self-driving car. Anyone claiming a self-driving car today is a bit high on their own marketing, and there's no clear route to getting beyond that point.
Re:On being wrong about AI by fragmede on Thursday December 14, 2023 @07:17AM (#38640554)
I summon a Waymo car every few days, and it takes me from point A to point B for about the same price as an Uber or Lyft. This only works so long as point A and B are both in San Francisco, but for an average person in San Francisco with access to the app, self-driving cars are already here. You can argue that person isn't average for a number of reasons, but the cars are real and giving rides to members of the general public.

https://youtu.be/-Rxvl3INKSg is a news reporter's video of taking a ride in one, so you can see what it's like to ride in one. She's a news reporter and thus not your average person because she has access to Waymo because she's a reporter, but members of the general public are also getting access and are able to do this as well. After watching that, I think a reasonable average person could believe that self driving cars are here.

As was said upthread, the future is here but unevenly distributed.

Re:On being wrong about AI by fragmede on Thursday December 14, 2023 @07:28AM (#38640635)
The report that came out was about Cruise. Waymo didn't have the same "unsatisfying amount of human input behind the scenes".
Re:On being wrong about AI by NoGravitas on Thursday December 14, 2023 @11:29AM (#38643145)
As far as you know, yet.
Re:On being wrong about AI by Kuinox on Thursday December 14, 2023 @07:23AM (#38640605)
Supersonic passenger jets have another problem, the Concorde demonstated it: it made so much noise countries forbid it from flying over their land.
Re:On being wrong about AI by hotpotamus on Thursday December 14, 2023 @07:33AM (#38640663)
Then the real innovation that we’ve lacked since the Concorde is quiet (and probably economical) supersonic flight.
Re:On being wrong about AI by Kuinox on Thursday December 14, 2023 @08:19AM (#38641013)
It's a long way until commercial usage since even prototypes didn't flew yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_X-59_Quesst