I mean, while this idea is obviously a stupid one, I have seen some suggestion that an AI could be used to help interperet the brain activity of patients that are capable of thought but not communication, and thus help them communicate with doctors, rather than try to figure out what they might have said from prior history.
I do not recommend using the word “AI” as if it refers to a single thing that encompasses all possible systems incorporating AI techniques. LLM guys don’t distinguish between things that could actually be built and “throwing an LLM at the problem” – you’re treating their lack-of-differentiation as valid and feeding them hype.
“Can AI do [Blank]” is getting pretty old. They will literally fill in that blank with anything they can come up with and it’s getting kinda silly.
Here’s a list of potential new AI articles I predict coming out within the next year:
- “Can AI teach us more about the dinosaurs?”
- “How AI will solve the climate crisis.”
- “New AI technology let’s you speak with deceased loved ones with staggering accuracy.”
- “How AI can help you save money.”
- “New AI model lets us translate dead languages.”
- “Soon all your friends will be AI.”
- “AI can help you lose weight.”
- “How we can use AI to find aliens.”
I’m sure at least one of these articles already exists. Literally all they are trying to do is make money with half baked ideas or steal your personal data.
a fun little rule of thumb that I like to apply is that whenever an article’s headline is a question you may safely presume the answer is usually no.
I propose the Gerard Extension for Betteridge’s Law: by appending ‘, and what the hell is wrong with you?’ to Betteridge’s output.
As per the headline.
* The Castor-Gerard Extension
worst prog rock band ever
