Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

NinjaLanternShark t1_isrd66p wrote

tl;dr:

> researchers at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Light in Germany asked the artificially intelligent software to predict how AI progressed.

> They did this by feeding the AI information from academic papers dating all the way back to 1994. [..] The AI was then asked to make predictions about how artificial intelligence has developed over the years based on the scientific studies it knew about it.

So given some body of research, forecast the future arc of developments in that field.

Achieving 99% accuracy is just a matter of framing the questions right.

406

Level-Infiniti t1_isresj2 wrote

yeah, article title makes it sound like the show Devs. worth a watch for those that haven't seen it

130

chantsnone t1_isrf6f7 wrote

Loved devs. I’d love more things exploring that idea.

26

Veearrsix t1_isrluo7 wrote

Seriously, fantastic show. Fun to see Nick Offerman in something a little different for him.

17

fuckswithboats t1_isrugkv wrote

Wish they had stretched that show out longer. The premise was delicious

8

icefire555 t1_isrj04e wrote

Yeah, I'm 100% sure we would have never learned about it if it was able to predict the stock market with that accuracy.

36

tucci007 t1_isrvtbl wrote

feed it all the information in existence about chickens, then everything about roads

then ask it, why did the chicken cross the road

15

ashakar t1_isrs42z wrote

Nothing ever will because you have too many irrational actors.

5

GregTheMad t1_isrt3lj wrote

How many? 8 billion? That's not much when it comes to computing. Most of them probably can even be grouped together. Depending on what you ask maybe only a handful is needed, like world leaders. The only challenge is getting the model right, and feeding it good data.

5

ashakar t1_isrtkkv wrote

I was specifically referring to the stock market. Shopping and ad algorithms already work pretty damn good at predicting what to show you.

1

icefire555 t1_isrug5t wrote

Yeah. well even if it was 75% accurate at predicting the stock market it would be a secret till death.

4

Sonamdrukpa t1_iss8hiw wrote

If you could get 50.1% your grandchildren would be buying islands in the Caribbean for their grandchildren

2

ashakar t1_isrul8o wrote

Black swan events would still fuck you. They are already using AI bots to make trades.

1

starfleetdropout6 t1_isrxpzb wrote

"We" would never know. The elite would keep it a secret to enrich themselves.

2

theminglepringle t1_isrukcr wrote

That’s easy you just have to have enough money own a lot of shares in a company sell them all watch as the price plummet’s because everyone one else who own shares in it get scared then buy back your shares or more for a lower price rinse and repeat

1

nasanu t1_isrdy1u wrote

>Achieving 99% accuracy is just a matter of framing the questions right.

Or in other words ask a bunch of crap, discard all the incorrect answers, then hold up the rest as proof of how accurate you are.

18

NinjaLanternShark t1_isrex37 wrote

The concept of tuning your forecast to a desired accuracy is actually pretty interesting. For example, say you need a weather forecast that's 99% accurate. A meteorologist will then tell you how far into the future you can go. In this case it might be 10 or 15 minutes. It might sound silly to us but there's probably a use case for it.

I don't imagine the folks at the Max Planck institute are slouches, so I'm assuming there's a use case for scanning some literature and determining some outcome with 99% accuracy. It's probably not a very profound prediction, but again, it wouldn't surprise me if there's a perfectly reasonable use case.

13

Read_ity t1_isrqnn1 wrote

Just tell me who to bet on Sundays and we’re good

2

tucci007 t1_isrvq1z wrote

> feeding the AI information from academic papers dating all the way back to 1994

this is how it will become self-aware

2

UNODIR t1_isrp5mh wrote

Future can not be predicted because it is not determined. You can foresight (not forecast) different futures.

So whatever this is - it reminds me of the kraken that predicted football games. You can believe it if you want.

1

[deleted] t1_israyxd wrote

The Sun. Lovely. And the link to the paper doesn't work, and looks like a pc shortcut pasted in.

79

Monster-Zero t1_isrhswm wrote

That is exactly what happened. Now I know that Charlotte is running a Windows computer and that she downloaded a file from… somewhere. Presumably about something.

Quality reporting.

11

ltethe t1_isrg5th wrote

I can predict the future too. Ask me what time it will be any time from now.

76

__The__Anomaly__ t1_isri1jj wrote

Oh great Oracle. What time will it be at noon tomorrow?

28

komark- t1_isro5kt wrote

THE TIME SHALL BE BOUT TREE FITTY

29

oniony t1_isrs1bq wrote

I think you meant to write SELECT systimetamp FROM dual;

4

[deleted] t1_isrmxx8 wrote

That is a false oracle, I am The Oracle, ask me the time.

−1

minnesota420 t1_isri9k2 wrote

What time will it be any time from now?

4

ltethe t1_isrigif wrote

It will be then.

24

Lankuri t1_isrk3wm wrote

journalistic integrity be DAMNED i need to write an ARTICLE about this

12

ManOfTheMeeting t1_isrtvdr wrote

You just need to find a way to calculate 99% accuracy based on two sentences.

2

Cr4mwell t1_isrj67a wrote

I wish people like this would get fined for false advertising. Clickbait titles like this one mislead and confuse the public which is the last thing this society needs.

45

WoodenSporkAudio t1_isrtskk wrote

How else do you make money from worthless articles? Outrage or fear mongering with downright misleading or even totally false representations of any facet of any topic, of course!

7

its_coo_baby t1_israjv7 wrote

Like day-of-the-week predictions or like lottery numbers?

27

Arikaido777 t1_isrj7ky wrote

it knows which horse wins the race but it wont tell you which race

16

zeptillian t1_isrgzu1 wrote

I can't download a PDF from your fucking desktop Charlotte.

I'm just going to have to assume you are as bad at interpreting studies are you are at using hyperlinks.

11

meeklys t1_isri9e9 wrote

I don’t know you but I love you for the delivery of your comment alone. First time I’ve laughed out loud in a long while, so thanks for that.

1

Rodentsnipe t1_isrivrh wrote

link to the paper referenced in the article lmao

https://users/charlotte/Downloads/Predicting_the_Future_of_AI_with_AI_High-quality_l.pdf

9

harry3harry3harry t1_isru0lg wrote

So this is how tech-savvy Charlotte Edwards, their Assistant Technology and Science Editor, appears to be. Food for thought...

2

ZedTT t1_isrv445 wrote

Holy shit that's hilarious.

I'm no longer mad about how stupid the title of the article is I'm just glad I've been given this absolute piece of gold.

1

pina_koala t1_isrkm7q wrote

This is probably the trashiest, lamest Sun article I've ever come across and that's saying a LOT

8

DatStankBooty t1_isrespb wrote

Really curious about my next bowel movement after chipotle.

7

Dameyeyo t1_isrlfxg wrote

I can see explosive diarrhea in the near future for you Sir , if you eat to much of chipotle hot sauce I can also see your hole getting red.

1

MKT_Pro t1_isrlmr0 wrote

Bloody of course. Hope you have some chipotlaway handy.

1

Turd-In-Your-Pocket t1_isrq80v wrote

From the article: Fortunately, the AI didn't predict a deadly apocalypse or a robot takeover.

That’s exactly what an apocalyptic murderous AI would say.

6

gtwizzy8 t1_isrv7dv wrote

TL:DR Yo dawg, we heard you like AI. So we put some AI in your AI so you could AI while you AI

4

stargazer1Q84 t1_isryzze wrote

That's a terrible headline and I'm disappointed in this sub for giving it exposure.

2

Stephen_P_Smith OP t1_isrb098 wrote

Submission statement: I find the claim that AI can predict the future with 99% accuracy to be overly sensational, and in need of statistical benchmarking! But that is just my singular opinion, and I am wondering how other more sophisticated thinkers might react. Hence, this article was shared here. Cheers!

1

[deleted] t1_isrc4bz wrote

I think that there is no information available but a claim. No link to the research, or even anything in the article backing that 99% number.

10

Astranoth t1_isrcylv wrote

Article is a mess. I can’t find any date stamps on when they tried this. Can’t find any details on how they got to 99%

Sensationalist click bait imo

8

ChronoPsyche t1_isrggbi wrote

No need for more sophisticated readers here. It's usually always safe to assume the Sun is a sensationalist pile of trash. Next time, see if you can find a more credible source reporting it first and then post it. If not, just leave it be. A lot of Redditors only look at the headline and will be misinformed by this.

4

VaultdBoy t1_isry4j3 wrote

https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.00881 I found this, with the percentage mentioned in the "AI based solutions" part So the pure ML results are pretty low compared to the 99% accuracy, which is achieved with mixed ML and Hand Crafted methods

1

FuturologyBot t1_isre4ar wrote

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Stephen_P_Smith:

Submission statement: I find the claim that AI can predict the future with 99% accuracy to be overly sensational, and in need of statistical benchmarking! But that is just my singular opinion, and I am wondering how other more sophisticated thinkers might react. Hence, this article was shared here. Cheers!

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/y6ut1m/spooky_artificial_intelligence_found_to/isrb098/

1

GloriaVictis101 t1_isrj3w5 wrote

This article somehow has more ads than words in it. Bravo ‘The Sun’

1

meetmyfriendme t1_isrki0g wrote

Probably not surprising as it would have included our biases to some degree. I wonder if it could then be asked to predict something outside of that in order to direct scientists to a novel research direction.

1

Shibbystix t1_isrkjsq wrote

Let me lay it out for you.

Ahem......We as a species.......

Are stupid and easy to predict.

1

lothar74 t1_isrl3cu wrote

I predict that in the future, news websites that want to be properly respected will not use hyphens in their domain names.

1

g_man_89 t1_isrlhse wrote

Holy crap this is so cool and scary at the same time. If given the right information we can get a sneak peak into where it is heading

1

xauching t1_isrnm1g wrote

If History classes have taught me anything its not predicting the future that's the hard part.

its making people learn from it.

1

xeonicus t1_isrnrqw wrote

Just don't feed the AI access to social media. It'll get less reliable.

1

MadMcCabe t1_isrob8a wrote

So it made logical predictions about ai us research predictions about ai and was able to "predict" things that have already happened?

1

passingconcierge t1_isrqmly wrote

All this article tells you is that it is possible to frame a question that you know the answer to and then to have a statistical system extract the answer you first thought of from a data set. That is more a caution about the problems of taking AI systems uncritically at face value and perhaps the need for double blinding in predictive systems.

1

zamalek33 t1_isrrl7w wrote

If there is anything AI can certainly not do then it is predicting the future. Complete nonsense But AI can predict single human behaviour and that makes it 10 times more powerful.

1

dkangx t1_isrtv9s wrote

This is The Sun. Never been to a grocery store checkstand?

1

smokecat20 t1_isryiae wrote

Can it predict the lottery numbers? I need to win before the collapse.

1

bigboyeTim t1_isrylfr wrote

"ARTIFICIAL intelligence was asked to predict the future and was right over 9 per cent of the time, according to new research."

1

OliverSparrow t1_ist33so wrote

To quote the famous remark: "If you're so smart, how come you ain't rich?" If thisd fatuous headlien was even vaguely correct, the owners of this device would be cackling al the way to the bank. Instead, they write feeble press releases.

1