Fuck these headlines.
We know this isn’t about LLMs, but clearly the intent of newspapers and their backers is to make the general public believe it is.
Nah, this story has been developing since before the LLM boom. “AI” has never been rare in science headlines like this.
Yeah but now the meaning of the word AI has changed in most people’s minds to mean generative ai and mostly LLMs.
Well, apparently journalists here are doing a good job and actually understand that generative AI and machine learning models pertain to the same family of techniques.
I wouldn’t call that “doing a good job”. If they were doing a good job, they would disambiguate Machine Learning from Generative AI. I don’t know that they’re doing this intentionally, but i would definitely appreciate that distinction being made.
I work in the field of machine learning as a researcher. There is no distinction. Machine learning is a set of techniques, Artificial Intelligence is a synonym which became popular in recent years.
Generative AI only defines how a model is used, not what the model is. You might as well use a kNN model to do generative AI. Generative AI is machine learning. More specifically it is an application of supervised machine learning.
Some people have started distinguishing machine learning to identify classical models and AI to definite stuff that uses deep learning.
If you want to be specific you may use the name of the specific model, but that’s a bit too much for an article title. Otherwise, the term AI is quite appropriate in this context and far more recognized than ML.
And me myself never say AI, I don’t like too much that it ingrains some feeling of intelligence; but for these articles i feel it is appropriate.
As someone else who works in ML but as a user for research purposes, I agree that there is no technical distinction but we’re talking about public communications here. You and I both know that AI and ML are the same thing. Most people do not. If I talked with my mom about AI she would assume I mean generative AI. She wouldn’t understand the nuance in your comment.
In fact, even as a researcher who uses both simple ML techniques and generative AI, I tend to make the assumption that when someone mentions AI they mean generative AI.
Common language changes based on the common understanding of society. The fact that the technical terms mean something different from the common understanding in society means that we need to be even more careful with the terms that we use, especially with something as polarizing as generative AI.
We have a different opinion here. I don’t think general public has an understanding of the difference between the two things. It may be useful to teach people about it, but I’m not sure how much it would help. People understand generative AI when they hear AI because it’s been the only thing they’ve been in direct contact with. Despite them using ML every day in different aspects of their life this is not something they get to know about. LLMs are different since they directly use the model.
I feel it is good people are getting to know ML and the fact that it is a useful technology; the fact that currently it is associated with LLMs is a side effect. It probably would be better if it wasn’t that way, but I do not see it as a big problem.
On the fact that it is polarizing, sure that is currently the case; probably it won’t be so in 10 years. That is nothing compared to the past 70 years in which ML has been used and applied in several fields with great success without anyone knowing it even existed.
Actual AI, learning models, not large language models hallucinating things.
Exactly. The fact that “AI” has now been almost completely associated with LLMs is incredibly frustrating.
Indeed this was probably Convolutional Neural Network
This is the prize https://scrollprize.org/
So this is more of machine learning than AI?
AI is the larger umbrella term. LLMs, Machine Learning, CNNs, DNNs, RNNs, etc. all fall under that umbrella “AI” term.
Yeah, even pathfinding is “AI” but people associate it only with slop these days.
Like some Dunning Kruger effect sweeping the world.
Well when they said the Pentagon was using AI to help coordinate the attacks on Iran, I simply assumed it was some expert system with a machine learning component. But no, it turns out they were using Grok, an actual LLM chatbot. Which is fucking crazy.
So sometimes the assumption goes the other way as well.
I’d imagine they measured metrics of other automated systems and compared with LLM and found out LLM works best.
It’s not like traditional machine learning models are suddenly perfect and work in all cases.
Looking at the results of the war in Iran, I’d suggest your assumptions are incorrect.
The results of the war do not depend solely on the quality of a single tool or weapon.
The US has better weapons overall and is not winning, thus it is not a way to discriminate whether this technology is useful or not.
I’d imagine they measured
This is the most vibe-coded democratic administration in history. They measured nothing, and fired anyone suggesting otherwise.
I doubt the government directly manages military decisions. I’d imagine the people taking these decisions are in that position regardless of which party is at the government.
No there’s an unfortunate thing where AI now means you need a transformer model in some capacity. It’s so bullshit now. I hate these idiotic researchers sometimes.
LLM is “actual AI”. I think the term you may be looking for is “generative AI”.
In the old sense of the word, we don’t have an actual AI yet, but it’s true that LLM and AI have become interchangeable.
All AI is actual AI. It doesn’t need to be real intelligence to be artificial, should be obvious. Are you telling me artificial grass shouldn’t be called that because a goat can’t eat it?
No, he’s questioning the intelligence part and not if it’s artificial or not.
Do you question the grass part of artificial grass? It’s obviously not grass.
Except it is a fairly good artifice of grass. “AI” is not a good artifice of intelligence. GAI would be, but not LLMs or anything else we have today. They aren’t trying to mimic intelligence. They’re trying to mimic the output of intelligence. They don’t think; they reproduce.
Except it is a fairly good artifice of grass.
Good for what? Looking at? It’s not gonna satisfy a goat.
We only care for the look (“the output”), and we don’t expect more of it, or sell it for more than it is. That’s why it’s not a controversial term for astroturf. It wasn’t controversial for AI either until very recently. In 60 years of AI nobody has split hairs over output of intelligence. It’s justified but weirdly misdirected anger.
AI is a perfectly cromulent word for the thing.
Correct, but it’s semantics. Most people just think all AI is generative these days, and so I’m trying to differentiate.
Well there is what people think and then there is reality
Yes, but people are reading Lemmy and responding in this thread.
I’d even argue that generative AI is machine learning, except the learning stops when the training does so it’s not learning continuously like ML in the classical sense.
Inference and training are separate in every ML architecture, what are you on about? And yes LLMs are ML, by definition, no need to argue.
“We’ve been trying to reach you about your cars extended warranty…”
Do you want to awaken ancient Italian zombie hoardes? Because this is how you awaken ancient Italian zombie hoardes.
Didn’t this happen years ago? I remember them doing the same thing using some heuristic algorithm long before llms were on the scene.
The article never mentioned LLMs. LLMs only make up a small part of all AI tools. The AI in this sense is referring to machine learning models used to help digitally unroll the scroll and then another machine learning model that’s used to detect the letters.
It’s a continuation of work started in 2023.
There have been numerous developments in recent years but this latest one […] is a “historic breakthrough,” according to those involved.
Ah, that makes sense. Maybe i read an earlier article where they had only partially recovered.
Does it have a load of em dashes in the text?
it’s not just a load of em dashes, it’s also a…
"The text appears to be a philosophical discussion of ethics, arts and human behavior, probably reflecting Stoic thought, the researchers say. "
Slightly off-topic: has anyone else had YouTube’s algorithm pushing AI-generated videos that claim to be about stoicism but with actual content that’s PUA bullshit? It’s all quite weird. Even the few that were really about stoicism were halfbaked crap.
If I recall correctly, that’s consistent with the other scrolls from that library that have been deciphered by different methods, so at least some of the text is likely to be correct.
Yeah if I remember correctly, the villa where these scrolls were found housed stoic philosophers or something. It was also originally owned by Julius Caesars father in law.
I actually visited Herculaneum a couple of years ago. Pretty cool sight. You can see the charred wooden beams of this villa sticking out of the dirt cliff. When no one was looking I picked small a charred wooden bit off the ground. Probably shouldn’t have done that, but there were lots of these small pieces just lying there on the ground, and I couldn’t help myself.
“Dear diary, boy I sure hope that volcano doesn’t erupt.”
How the fuck did the make the training set for this?
BBQ your own scrolls
The training set would just be text. The AI’s job is to find it.
Nature has done all it can to hide the secrets of a better society. Can we not let the perfect future just rest? We clearly don’t deserve the sacred truths found within those scrolls.
How exactly is a society of imperialistic slavers better than ours?
It’s remarkable how many people take this comment at face value
I was so drunk lol
