←back to thread

128 points ArmageddonIt | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.193s | source
Show context
jampa ◴[] No.44501089[source]
I like Steve's content, but the ending misses the mark.

With the carriage / car situation, individual transportation is their core business, and most companies are not in the field of Artificial Intelligence.

I say this as someone who has worked for 7 years implementing AI research for production, from automated hardware testing to accessibility for nonverbals: I don't think founders need to obsess even more than they do now about implementing AI, especially in the front end.

This AI hype cycle is missing the mark by building ChatGPT-like bots and buttons with sparkles that perform single OpenAI API calls. AI applications are not a new thing, they have always been here, now they are just more accessible.

The best AI applications are beneath the surface to empower users, Jeff Bezos says that (in 2016!)[1]. You don't see AI as a chatbot in Amazon, you see it for "demand forecasting, product search ranking, product and deals recommendations, merchandising placements, fraud detection, translations."

[1]: https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/company-news/2016-letter-to...

replies(10): >>44501192 #>>44501224 #>>44501278 #>>44501389 #>>44501569 #>>44505291 #>>44505340 #>>44505796 #>>44506753 #>>44508378 #
jayd16 ◴[] No.44501192[source]
It may be true but Bezos' comment is also classic smoke blowing. "Oh well you can't see us using <newest hype machine> or quantify it's success but it's certainly in everything we do!"
replies(1): >>44501228 #
anon7000 ◴[] No.44501228[source]
But it’s completely true — Amazon undoubtedly has a pretty advanced logistics set up and certainly uses AI all over the place. Even if they’re not a big AI researcher.

There are a lot of great use cases for ML outside of chatbots

replies(2): >>44504983 #>>44508360 #
1. airstrike ◴[] No.44508360[source]
It's not "generative AI" which is what most people mean when they say "AI" today, outside of "old school" AI/ML folks.

So at best technically correct on his part but still semantically incorrect