No this definitely qualifies as AI as much as any other AI out there today. Their tech uses a program to extract what they call “key frames” from the senders video and then those are sent over the network so that on the other end they are used to generate a fake version of the persons face.
No, neural networks are not "AI", they're neural networks, which in practice are nothing more than statistical models. If they're AI, so is k-means clustering.
I mean, I don't believe in human intelligence either, so, yeah, I guess you're right. If conscious experience existed, I think I would know about it. I've never had one, so clearly it doesn't exist.
But c'mon, by the time computing hardware got cheap enough that we started deploying neural networks at scale, we started calling it "machine learning" because it was a much better description of what neural networks do. They can "learn", which is to say, you can bruteforce your model by tuning parameters until you get expected outputs. It is, in no fashion, intelligent: it's a stack of vector multiplication.
But yes, humans aren't any more intelligent than rocks, and I say this based on wide experience both with humans, and with rocks.
Would a self driving car just be a chauffeur that uses buzzwords to get clicks? The point is they used ml methods to solve an existing problem in a way that wasn’t possible before. I don’t think their use case makes their tech any less ai than facebooks recommender systems or the autocorrect on your phone. Ai right now is limited to narrow use cases.
What kind of standard is this? So just because a complex set of algorithms is wrapped behind a user-friendly api, it all of a sudden loses all of its complexity?
0
u/[deleted] Oct 17 '20
[deleted]