this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
73 points (90.1% liked)

Socialism

5113 readers
213 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Fusion's close to a core need of humanity.

[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wait, you think fusion will be developed thanks to AI?

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, I haven't seen any major technological breakthroughs coming from language models, other than language models themselves. Have you?

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No. You want to suddenly change the subject to language models?

[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What other type of current AI claims problem-solving capabilities?

[–] DarkenLM@kbin.earth 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The entire field of Machine Learning, that has existed for decades, long before LLMs were even a theory?

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This thread is funny. A few users are like "😡😡😡I hate everything about AI😡😡😡" and also "😲😲😲AI is used for technical research??? 😲😲😲 This is news to me! 😲😲😲"

Talk about no-investigation-no-right-to-speak. How can you have an opinion on a field without even knowing roughly what the field is?

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So, are there any results of technological achievements from any AI models that show a trend towards increasing solving of scientific and technical problems?

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yes. I mean, this is absolute basics.

[–] TheDoctor@hexbear.net 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think you’re going to need to link to some proof or example. You’re clearly using a definition of AI that’s broader than the colloquial definition everyone’s assuming you’re using.

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Here is the latest edition of Nature Machine Intelligence, to give you a basic idea of the sort of research that constitutes the AI field: https://www.nature.com/natmachintell/current-issue

Topics in Frontiers In Artificial Intelligence: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/artificial-intelligence/research-topics

Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning: https://www.nowpublishers.com/MAL

[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The very first link shows that this is incremental benefit that's been taking place since 2010. Computational tools are useful, but you're providing mostly links of algorithms/learning models to sort pictures for medical purposes and diagnosis (useful and cool), and saying that somehow that means fusion will be solved by AI

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I'm mostly answering the question I was asked: what are some examples of technical research in the field.

How can we solve plasma control without AI? And why exclude that tool?

[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not saying we should exclude any tools, I'm just skeptical about the trend of calling everything AI, attributing all computational advances to AI, and jumping into the bandwagon of businesses trying to oversell any and all computating as AI.

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

That's just cosmetic stuff. Why care about what words people use?

[–] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 7 points 1 day ago

Because the words people use are very very important.

[–] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 5 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Because that's how you end up with dipshits calling federal funding of the CIA socialism.

Socialism is when the government does stuff. If it does a lot of stuff that's communism.

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

That's the least plausible slippery-slope argument I have heard this month.

[–] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 4 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

And yet I can go to some TYT video or a DSA meeting and hear some dipshit lib say socialism is when the government does stuff IRL.

Hell, I can go find a few coworkers who say that too, and immediately follow it up with calling Kamala a communist and Biden a Maoist.

But I suppose that's A-okay with you since

That's just cosmetic stuff. Why care about what words people use?

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

As you're trying to make a link between [using neural nets to research plasma control for fusion] and [Biden is a Maoist], I have no.reason to take you seriously.

[–] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 4 points 21 hours ago

You're advocating for the dilution of linguistic terminology and making it so you can smear people who hate dogshit stolen art as people who hate medical science.

The only person who shouldn't be taken seriously is you.

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Like if I go to Journal of Fusion Energyhttps://link.springer.com/journal/10894 – the latest article is titled 'Artificial Neural Network-Based Tomography Reconstruction of Plasma Radiation Distribution at GOLEM Tokamak' and the 4th-latest is 'Deep Learning Based Surrogate Model a fast Soft X-ray (SXR) Tomography on HL-2 a Tokamak'. I am sorry if that upsets you but that's the way the field is.