Google Search Will Be Your Next Brain 45
New submitter Steven Levy writes with "a deep dive into Google's AI effort," part of a multi-part series at Medium. In 2006, Geoffrey Hinton made a breakthrough in neural nets that launched Deep Learning. Google is all-in, hiring Hinton, having its ace scientist Jeff Dean build the Google Brain, and buying the neuroscience-based general AI company DeepMind for $400 million. Here's how the push for scary-smart search worked, from mouths of the key subjects. The other parts of the series are worth reading, too.
What do you mean? (Score:4, Funny)
Google search will be my next brain? Who do you think you are talking to, some Yahoo or what?
Does Google lie? (Score:1)
Since TFA talks about Google offering a brain, an online smart brain, I just had to google "Does Google Lie" and guess what the first result was?
A link to Answer.com 'Does Google lie - Answers.com' which does not work !
And the instructions (type cat ./ type cheeseburger Mango) ain't making any sense either
Re: (Score:2)
So will my brain now have sponsored links and ads that track me wherever I go?
Re: (Score:3)
Nice work, but serious hubris and marketing going on here. Google can't seem to find a product these days, and this is just another attempt to get in on the non-robotic servant market. I wish they'd read the scifi books inspiring their products to the freaking end of the book.
Re:What do you mean? (Score:5, Funny)
Google doesn't need anymore money, thank you very much. It's fine that they 'waste' it on research. Much like ol Elon.
Nonetheless, I think they need to think about doing something with less potential for serious problems. I found the phrase
We never told it during training, ‘This is a cat,’” Dean told the New York Times. “It basically invented the concept of a cat.”
To be the scariest thing I've read all day. It did that by parsing YouTube. That was the first attempt to parse YouTube with 'Deep Learning".
I do not want to be around when it finally figures out about 4Chan.
Re: (Score:2)
Google doesn't need anymore money, thank you very much. It's fine that they 'waste' it on research. Much like ol Elon.
Nonetheless, I think they need to think about doing something with less potential for serious problems. I found the phrase
We never told it during training, ‘This is a cat,’” Dean told the New York Times. “It basically invented the concept of a cat.”
To be the scariest thing I've read all day. It did that by parsing YouTube. That was the first attempt to parse YouTube with 'Deep Learning".
I do not want to be around when it finally figures out about 4Chan.
My OMG moment came when I read
Re: (Score:2)
It invented cats, I think that's cool, who knows what it'll invent next.
Re: (Score:1)
because the air IS NOT BLUE
its a version of how a Rainbow forms (a sundown Red Shy is not because something changed in the air the light did)
Re: (Score:2)
So, deep learning will result in shallow thinking?
Re: (Score:3)
So, deep learning will result in shallow thinking?
Sure, same a smartphones make their users more stupid. ...
It's Candy Crush all the way down
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you were referring to the brain now present in your head?
Not a surprise (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He Man and the Masters of the Universe. (Score:1)
When I think of International Harvester, or American Tobacco, or Standard Oil, or US Steel, or AT&T, or Microsoft, or Google:
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:
And on the ped
Most human can't think critically (Score:1)
A good brain can conduct critical thinking
Sorry have to break it to ya ...
Almost all the homo homo sapiens in this world have a brain inside their skulls - in other words, they HAVE brains
However, most homo homo sapiens in this world can't even think critically
Re: Most human can't think critically (Score:2)
Quite a few of them don't even know that it's Homo sapiens sapiens!
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy to claim that "the other parts are worth reading" but the summary so far gives no indication of any reason why that would be the case, or even any reason why the claimant should be considered any more trustworthy than any other spammy marketeer. I, for one, shall not click those links.
That's because you don't hae your new brain yet.
Once you do, you will welcome your new brain overlords.
And when google discontinues that, you will just be brain-dead - the perfect consumer.
Oh great (Score:1)
Another serial medium.com unreadable clickbait spammer.
It Already Is (Score:2)
Need better personal/collective info tools to cope (Score:4, Interesting)
http://pcast.ideascale.com/a/d... [ideascale.com]
"This suggestion is about how civilians could benefit by have access to the sorts of "sensemaking" tools the intelligence community (as well as corporations) aspire to have, in order to design more joyful, secure, and healthy civilian communities (including through creating a more sustainable and resilient open manufacturing infrastructure for such communities)."
Even just to cope with the implications of what Google is doing in AI... Still working on them, slowly...
My feeling is that our trajectory coming out of any AI singularity will have a lot to do with out moral and social trajectory going into one. So, we should do all we can now to make the world a better place for everyone, to hopefully improve that outcome.
I used to do AI in the 1980s, with my undergrad work at Princeton related to the Pointrel system maybe helping a bit to inspire Wordnet (started by my undergrad advisor as I was graduating), and (accidentally) making probably the world's first simulation of self-replicating cannibalistic robots... But in hanging around CMU's Robotics Institute in the mid 1980s, I got the disturbing feeling that it might be too easy to make "Mind Children" good enough to destroy us humans, but not good enough to "replace" us. After all, an aggressive enough self-replicating robotic cockroach could probably do in the human species, and that does not take much intelligence. As I said at a talk I gave at a conference on AI and Simulation, it is very easy to make AI and robots that are destructive (as I learned unexpectedly from my own simulations); it is much harder to make robots that are cooperative (either with each other or humans). Someone from DARPA literally patted me on the back after that talk and said "keep up the good work" -- which gave me a lot of pause, but I'm not sure which aspect he emphasized (the destructive or constructive). But that sort-of cemented my feelings, and I have not worked much on "AI" since (in an independent AI sense; one might argue any knowledge management stuff has a flavor of AI, including my Pointrel system work).
Still, as with any arms race, and that is what the current push to AI has become, and arms race whether in commercial or military terms, it can be hard to figure out some way out of it before total destruction. So, better sensemaking tools might help with that. There are other problems we wrestle with as well that they could help with, like human health issues. Such tools, as they get smarter, will hopefully be designed as cooperative platforms, for each interaction between the machine and a person, and between people, and between machines.
http://www.shareintl.org/archi... [shareintl.org]
"These words written [praising competition] by American college students capture a sentiment that runs through the heart of the USA and appears to be spreading throughout the world. To these students, competition is not simply something one does, it is the very essence of existence. When asked to imagine a world without competition, they can foresee only rising prices, declining productivity and a general collapse of the moral order. Some truly believe we would cease to exist were it not for competition. Alfie Kohn, author of No contest: the case against competition, disagrees completely. He argues that competition is essentially detrimental to every important aspect of human experience; our relationships, self-esteem, enjoyment of leisure, and even productivity would all be improved if we were to break out of the pattern of relentless competition. Far from being idealistic speculation, his position is anchored in hundreds of research studies and careful analysis of the primary domains of competitive interaction. For those who see themselves assisting in a transition to a less competitive world, Kohn's book will be an invaluable resource."
In gen
So they want... (Score:1)
Really? I was just thinking they should leave out (Score:2)
Totally Amazed (Score:4, Insightful)
I kinda wish they would turn some of that computing power toward some blue sky science (imagine deep learning analyzing CERN data, or Hubble imagery, or the human genome, or protein folding, or all of the above). Maybe use some of the resultant knowledge to design and fabricate better components for itself.
Re: (Score:2)
So lets jump on it. No time like the present.
Deep Learning? Okay answer this! (Score:1)
*If you were a pirate, you know what would be the one thing that would really make you mad? Treasure chests with no handles. How the hell are you supposed to carry it?!*
Deep Learning? Deep Mind? (Score:2)
I'll wait for Deep Thought.
...this might take a while, though.
yeah right. (Score:2)
More likely google is struggling hard to justify being duped out of 400 million