this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
1157 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

74324 readers
3518 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

So are you alleging the studies, like the ones showing AI is vastly superior at identifying cancer in patients, are fabricated?

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I'm saying they can only do it because the big innovation was "throw more money at it." Yes, given a functionally infinite amount of hardware, electricity, legal free reign, and publicity, I could invent a machine that does at least one (1) impressive thing, too.

Remember, these models weren't created to identify cancer in patients better than humans. They were created to do everything better than humans. And the fact that they are mediocre at everything except identifying cancer in patients (and a handful of other things) means that they're failing at 99.997% of their goal.

That doesn't mean that it's innovative, or a breakthrough technology that deserves time to mature. It just means that you get more swings at the law of averages if you have a lot of money.