• eggymachus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Thanks, that was interesting. I kept thinking that this reads like something out of Quanta Magazine, and then at the end there was an attribution to them :)

    To all the reflexive AI-downvoters: This is about an application of machine learning, not an LLM. Don’t behave like an advanced autocomplete; think before you click :P

    • Dark_Dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Then the author could have written the headline as “Machine Learning” instead of clickbaity word like “AI”

      • Identity3000@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        In defence of the author, there is absolutely nothing about the term “AI” that just means “LLM” in an informed context (which is what Wired portends to be). And then the words “machine learning” are literally front and centre in the subtitle.

        I don’t see how anyone could misunderstand this unless it was a deliberate misreading… Or else just not attempting to read it at all…

        (That said, yes, I do hate the fact that product managers now love to talk about how every single feature is “AI” regardless of what it actually is/does)