this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2024
70 points (84.3% liked)
Asklemmy
43760 readers
1175 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Computer vision is one of those areas that promised the world but failed to deliver on many of its promises. I am not saying it won't be useful in a couple of decades for more complex scenarios than what we already have (e.g. given an image of a face recognize if it is the same face or find the rectangle in this image kind of tasks) but this whole "it will revolutionize everything in the next 5 years" nonsense is clearly wrong. Self-driving cars are one of the main fields that shows that computer vision still has severe limits.
And natural language processing is even more broken. Again, I am not saying it wouldn't be useful if it worked, I am saying it doesn't work nearly as well as people claim it does and it is not improving as quickly either.
I am not doubting the potential of the working technology, I am doubting that it works. Big difference compared to your historic example.