• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4518 hours ago

    “They used physics to do it” is just a laughably pathetic motivation. Nobel hated “abstract wankery” or “intellectual masturbation” and wanted to promote results which benefitted the common man and society directly. This is incidentally also why there doesn’t exist a Nobel prize in economics. The nobel prize comitte has since long abandoned Nobel’s will in this matter and it is anyones guess what the order of magnitude of spin Nobel’s corpse has accumulated.

  • @Etterra
    link
    English
    412 hours ago

    I mean we do kind of deserve it. But at least we’ve had a good run.

  • @expatriado
    link
    English
    611 day ago

    Physics’ Nobel prize awarded for a Computer Science achievement, actual physics is having a dry spell I guess

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      110 hours ago

      i’m here to remind you that for last 20ish years half of the time chemistry nobel goes to biologists, and now they doubled down on ai wankery with giving it to alphafold

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 hours ago

        To be fair, AlphaFold is pretty incredible. I remember when it was first revealed (but before they open sourced parts of it) that the scientific community were shocked by how effective it was and assumed that it was going to be technologically way more complex than it ended up being. Systems Biologist Mohammed AlQuraishi captures this quite well in this blog post

        I’m a biochemist who has more interest in the computery side of structural biology than many of my peers, so I often have people asking me stuff like “is AlphaFold actually as impressive as they say, or is it just more overhyped AI nonsense?”. My answer is “Yes.”

    • kamenLady.
      link
      English
      341 day ago

      Beyond recognizing the laureates’ inspirations from condensed-matter physics and statistical mechanics, the prize celebrates interdisciplinarity. At its core, this prize is about how elements of physics have driven the development of computational algorithms to mimic biological learning, impacting how we make discoveries today across STEM.

      They explain the flex at least

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 day ago

      To be fair, regardless of one’s stance on the utility of current AI or the wisdom of developing it, it is an extremely difficult and potentially world changing technical achievement, and given there isn’t a computer science prize, physics is probably the most relevant category to it

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        817 hours ago

        not really. A lot of techniques have been known for decades. What we didn’t have back then was insane compute power.

        and there’s the turing award for computer science.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          Insane compute wasn’t everything. Hinton helped develop the technique which allowed more data to be processed in more layers of a network without totally losing coherence. It was more of a toy before then because it capped out at how much data could be used, how many layers of a network could be trained, and I believe even that GPUs could be used efficiently for ANNs, but I could be wrong on that one.

          Either way, after Hinton’s research in ~2010-2012, problems that seemed extremely difficult to solve (e.g., classifying images and identifying objects in images) became borderline trivial and in under a decade ANNs went from being almost fringe technology that many researches saw as being a toy and useful for a few problems to basically dominating all AI research and CS funding. In almost no time, every university suddenly needed machine learning specialists on payroll, and now at about 10 years later, every year we are pumping out papers and tech that seemed many decades away… Every year… In a very broad range of problems.

          The 580 and CUDA made a big impact, but Hinton’s work was absolutely pivotal in being able to utilize that and to even make ANNs seem feasible at all, and it was an overnight thing. Research very rarely explodes this fast.

          Edit: I guess also worth clarifying, Hinton was also one of the few researching these techniques in the 80s and has continued being a force in the field, so these big leaps are the culmination of a lot of old, but also very recent work.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    It’s probably easier to righteously quit your job after a decade of collecting senior executive salary

    Also: physics?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    251 day ago

    I guess some people are genuinely concerned about AI wiping out humanity. Do not worry, that will never happen. We are already doing a fine job fostering our own extinction. If we keep going down our current path, those soulless robots will never even get the chance.

    Now, in truth, I do not know what will kill us first, but I reckon it is important to stay positive

    • @scarabic
      link
      English
      12 hours ago

      What’s laughable are the “terminator” scenarios where it suddenly comes to life in an instant and in that moment already has the power to wipe us out, and then does so.

      A more likely scenario is that we come to rely heavily on AI more and more as time goes by, until it truly does have a grip on resource supply chains, manufacturing facilities, energy plants, etc. And I don’t just mean that machine learning gets used in all of those contexts because we are already there. I’m talking about custodial authority. We’ve ceded those duties to it in large part - can’t do those jobs without AI.

      Then a malicious AI could put a real squeeze on humanity. It wouldn’t need to be a global war. Just enough disruption that we starve and begin to war among ourselves. Has anyone ever noticed how many of us there are now? Our population would absolutely fall apart without our massive industrial and agricultural complexes running full time.

    • @slaacaa
      link
      English
      816 hours ago

      I mean it’s definitely helping, but not in the way I imagined. It is becoming a major driver of CO2 emissions due to the large computational power if needs, which will only increase in the future. The planet is boiling, and they will keep building more server farms for the next LLM upgrade, giving up on stopping/controlling climate change.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        516 hours ago

        Wouldn’t that be something: we choke to death trying to create a supercomputer to tell us to stop doing exactly that

        True irony

      • Zos_Kia
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -112 hours ago

        To clarify: AI is NOT a major driver of CO2 emissions. The most pessimistic estimations place it at a fraction of a percent of global energy consumption by 2030.

        • @mriormro
          link
          English
          211 hours ago

          Ah, the crypto bro creed.

          • Zos_Kia
            link
            fedilink
            English
            110 hours ago

            I mean it is also true for crypto. BTC, the most energy-hungry blockchain, is estimated to burn ~150TWh/year, compared to a global consumption of 180 000TWh/y.

            Now is that consumption useless ? Yes, it is completely wasted. But it is a drop in the bucket. One shouldn’t underestimate the astounding energy consumption of legacy industries - as a whole the tech industry is estimated to represent just a few percents of the global energy budget.

  • @zlatiah
    link
    English
    620 hours ago

    So it was the physics Nobel… I see why the Nature News coverage called it “scooped” by machine learning pioneers

    Since the news tried to be sensational about it… I tried to see what Hinton meant by fearing the consequences. Believe he is genuinely trying to prevent AI development without proper regulations. This is a policy paper he was involved in (https://managing-ai-risks.com/). This one did mention some genuine concerns. Quoting them:

    “AI systems threaten to amplify social injustice, erode social stability, and weaken our shared understanding of reality that is foundational to society. They could also enable large-scale criminal or terrorist activities. Especially in the hands of a few powerful actors, AI could cement or exacerbate global inequities, or facilitate automated warfare, customized mass manipulation, and pervasive surveillance”

    like bruh people already lost jobs because of ChatGPT, which can’t even do math properly on its own…

    Also quite some irony that the preprint has the following quote: “Climate change has taken decades to be acknowledged and confronted; for AI, decades could be too long.”, considering that a serious risk of AI development is climate impacts

  • @Pieresqi
    link
    English
    523 hours ago

    Yeesh, everyone now jumps on the ai hypetrain.

  • @OutrageousUmpire
    link
    English
    -818 hours ago

    Most well-deserved physics Nobel I can remember.