Re:There Are No New Ideas in AI Only New Datasets
by gerdesj on Monday June 30, 2025 @08:54PM
(#44429515)
"He has built an AI system that fails to do X."
Perhaps you have put your finger on the fatal flaw ...
Re:There Are No New Ideas in AI Only New Datasets
by PeeMcGee on Tuesday July 01, 2025 @01:26AM
(#44430857)
> That does not mean there isn't an AI system that can do X.
You are holding the burden of proof here...
Re:There Are No New Ideas in AI Only New Datasets
by amelius on Tuesday July 01, 2025 @03:19AM
(#44431417)
No, Carmack holds the burden of proof because he started the argument. His incapable program does not prove anything.
Maybe this is formulated a bit harsh, but let us respect the logic here.
Re:There Are No New Ideas in AI Only New Datasets
by jeffreygoesto on Tuesday July 01, 2025 @02:45AM
(#44431240)
One of my supervisors used to say: "Don't tell me it's impossible, tell me _you_ could not do it." A true c_nt move that ends every discussion.
Re:There Are No New Ideas in AI Only New Datasets
by amelius on Tuesday July 01, 2025 @10:15AM
(#44434117)
Huh, by saying that something is impossible, __you__ are ending the discussion, not your professor.
He has built an AI system that fails to do X.
That does not mean there isn't an AI system that can do X. Especially considering that a lot is happening in AI, as you say.
Anyway, Carmack knows a lot about optimizing computations on modern hardware. In practice, that happens to be also necessary for AI. However, it is not __sufficient__ for AI.