When I started angel investing in the late 1990s, a tech investment included a significant technology risk, with the potential upside being groundbreaking innovation. Being an investor at this time meant taking a considerable technology risk and betting on actual tech, such as nanotech, semiconductors or biotech.

E-commerce, albeit hyped and interesting, was not considered tech. It was “Business 2.0”, plain and straightforward, hype included.

  • KingRandomGuy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    All of the “AI” garbage that is getting jammed into everything is merely scaled up from what has been before. Scaling up is not advancement.

    I disagree. Scaling might seem trivial now, but the state-of-the-art architectures for NLP a decade ago (LSTMs) would not be able to scale to the degree that our current methods can. Designing new architectures to better perform on GPUs (such as Attention and Mamba) is a legitimate advancement. Furthermore, the viability of this level of scaling wasn’t really understood for a while until phenomenon like double descent (in which test error surprisingly goes down, rather than up, after increasing model complexity past a certain degree) were discovered.

    Furthermore, lots of advancements were necessary to train deep networks at all. Better optimizers like Adam instead of pure SGD, tricks like residual layers, batch normalization etc. were all necessary to allow scaling even small ConvNets up to work around issues such as vanishing gradients, covariate shift, etc. that tend to appear when naively training deep networks.