- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
If an LLM can’t be trusted with a fast food order, I can’t imagine what it is reliable enough for. I really was expecting this was the easy use case for the things.
It sounds like most orders still worked, so I guess we’ll see if other chains come to the same conclusion.
it’s not ‘ai’, it’s just a poorly trained voice recognition system that’s trying to decipher any random person’s voice. voice rec has a difficult-enough time when trained on a single person in a professional setting (lawyer, doctor, etc)–which is work we used to do here. it’s going to absolutely fail in a ‘drive thru’ environment.
I’m baffled that you can say “It’s not ‘AI,’ it’s a machine learning powered speech to text system” with a straight face.
Even if we were to agree that ML-powered speech to text isn’t AI (and I don’t agree to that premise, for the record), there’s still the matter of processing the transcription to transform it into something that can be understood by the point of sale system - aka natural language processing. And while that NLP could be implemented without use of an LLM, given LLM’s current level of hype and the ease with which they can be shoved into any given product, I wouldn’t bet on Taco Bell execs approving such an approach, much less asking for it.
And none of that is AI, if we use the term in a way that’s useful and stop speaking in salesspeak. Machine learning algorythms, LLMs, all of that isn’t AI in any meaningful sense of the word. It’s all semantics of course, but the more sam altmans of the world are trying to blurry the line between intelligence and an algorythm that can identify a picture of hotdog, the more we kinda need to be stickers for the proper terminology. It was kinda cute at the beginning of this crazy cycle, but now when megacorpos are demanding all your data and putting their half-baked chatbots into everything, it’s not cute anymore.
Please, enlighten me - how do you propose we use the term “AI” in a way that’s more useful than a definition that includes machine learning, large language models, and computer vision?
I doubt I’ll agree with your definition, but I’m curious to see how you would exclude machine learning, computer vision, LLMs, etc., from your definition. My assumption is that your definition is going to be either a derivative of “AI is anything computers can’t do yet” or based on pop culture / sci fi, but maybe you’ll surprise me.
To be clear, I’m a software engineer; I’m not speaking in sales speak. I’ve derived my understanding of the term from a combination of its historical context and how it’s used in both professional and academic contexts, not from marketing propaganda or from sci fi and pop culture. I’m certainly aware of the hype machine that’s ongoing, but there are also tons of fascinating advancements happening on a regular basis, and the term “AI” is at minimum a useful term to refer to technologies that leverage similar techniques.
“It’s not AI, it’s just <multiple things that all fall under the category of Artificial Intelligence>”.
AI is a huge field of computer science. It’s not the one tiny narrow definition of artificial general intelligence like HAL 9000 or Skynet or Detroit Become Human.
It’s not AI unless it’s running on a cluster of H200s. Anything else is just sparkling text prediction.