And i don’t mean stuff like deepfakes/sora/palantir/anything like that, im talking about why the anti-genai crowd isn’t providing an alternative where you can get instant feedback when you’re journaling
And i don’t mean stuff like deepfakes/sora/palantir/anything like that, im talking about why the anti-genai crowd isn’t providing an alternative where you can get instant feedback when you’re journaling
I sent the story on perplexity and looked at its sources :P (people often ask me how I find sources, I just ask perplexity and then look at its links and find one that fits)
https://asiatimes.com/2023/03/ai-warship-designer-accelerating-chinas-naval-lead/ they report here that a paper was published in a science journal, though Chinese-language.
I did find this paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S004579492400049X but it’s not from the same team and seems to be about a different problem, though still in ship design (hull specifically) and mentions neural networks.
This is sort of the issue with “AI” often just meaning “good software” rather than any specific technique.
From a quick read the first one seems to refer to a knowledge-base or auto-CAD solution which is fundamentally different from any methods related to LLMs.
The second one is some actually really impressive feature engineering used to solve an optimization problem with Machine Learning tools, which is actually much closer to a statistician using linear regressions and data mining than somebody using an LLM or a GAN.
Importantly, neither method is as computationally intensive as LLMs, and the second one at least is a very involved process requiring a lot of domain knowledge, which is exactly the opposite of how GenAI markets itself.