this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
1326 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

59599 readers
3401 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 316 points 1 month ago (15 children)

There’s an alternate timeline where the non-profit side of the company won, Altman the Conman was booted and exposed, and OpenAI kept developing machine learning in a way that actually benefits actual use cases.

Cancer screenings approved by a doctor could be accurate enough to save so many lives and so much suffering through early detection.

Instead, Altman turned a promising technology into a meme stock with a product released too early to ever fix properly.

[–] msage@programming.dev 7 points 1 month ago (10 children)

What is OpenAI doing with cancer screening?

[–] mustbe3to20signs 29 points 1 month ago (2 children)

AI models can outmatch most oncologists and radiologists in recognition of early tumor stages in MRI and CT scans.
Further developing this strength could lead to earlier diagnosis with less-invasive methods saving not only countless live and prolonging the remaining quality life time for the individual but also save a shit ton of money.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 33 points 1 month ago (4 children)

That is a different kind of machine learning model, though.

You can't just plug in your pathology images into their multimodal generative models, and expect it to pop out something usable.

And those image recognition models aren't something OpenAI is currently working on, iirc.

[–] mustbe3to20signs 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm fully aware that those are different machine learning models but instead of focussing on LLMs with only limited use for mankind, advancing on Image Recognition models would have been much better.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

I agree but I also like to point out that the AI craze started with LLMs and those MLs have been around before OpenAI.

So if openAI never released chat GPT, it wouldn’t have become synonymous with crypto in terms of false promises.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

Not only that, image analysis and statistical guesses have always been around and do not need ML to work. It’s just one more tool in the toolbox.

[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Fun thing is, most of the things AI can, they never planned it to be able to do it. All they tried to achieve was auto completion tool.

[–] tfowinder@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

Don't know about image recognition but they released DALL-E , which is image generating and in painting model.

[–] msage@programming.dev 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wasn't it proven that AI was having amazing results, because it noticed the cancer screens had doctors signature at the bottom? Or did they make another run with signatures hidden?

[–] mustbe3to20signs 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

There were more than one system proven to "cheat" through biased training materials. One model used to tell duck and chicken apart because it was trained with pictures of ducks in the water and chicken on a sandy ground, if I remember correctly.
Since multiple medical image recognition systems are in development, I can't imagine they're all ~~this faulty~~ trained with unsuitable materials.

[–] msage@programming.dev 6 points 1 month ago

They are not 'faulty', they have been fed wrong training data.

This is the most important aspect of any AI - it's only as good as the training dataset is. If you don't know the dataset, you know nothing about the AI.

That's why every claim of 'super efficient AI' need to be investigated deeper. But that goes against line-goes-up principle. So don't expect that to happen a lot.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)