JackbyDev,

I talk about this a lot. It’s a conspiracy theory of mine that this comic spurred the AI image tech we have today.

Poik,
@Poik@pawb.social avatar

Not only is this not obsolete, it’s close to biographical as it closely references the first and second Artificial Intelligence Winters. The first being in the 60s. We’ve been working on these for a long time, so 5 years is short. It took until GPGPU to kick into full gear and some clever insights to get Deep Learning up and running (somewhat attributed to work published in 2011) to start reliably on this problem, and even that is an oversimplification of the timeline and the scope.

Others have mentioned oddities like the difficulty of subject matter (picture contains a bird vs picture of a bird) but there are a lot harder problems that are trivial to humans and counterintuitively incredibly hard for computers.

technom,

Epilogue: She got what she asked for and completed the work 5 years ago.

vox,
@vox@sopuli.xyz avatar

… it’s still true…

PP_BOY_,
@PP_BOY_@lemmy.world avatar

Or just do what iNaturalist does and have the community identify the photo

obosob,
@obosob@feddit.uk avatar

Even with AI models that can identify that there are birds in the picture. Having it decide with accuracy that the picture is of a bird is still a hard problem.

modulojs,

I remember this one. It seems as spot on now as it was then, IMO. It’s not trying to say that object detection is magic or impossible, since it was totally possible then as well. It just requires a dedicated team + time + money to pay them, which is what this comic was trying to express. It is true there are more off-the-shelf software available for newer programmers now than there was before, so dev time is shorter, but that’s more just degrees of comfort / budget as opposed to anything fundamentally different.

tvbusy,

It could have been the other way around if global positioning systems were either not developed or used only by the military. In that case, detecting scenery of a park could be easier than trying to figure out the position on the map.

Or it could just be that maps data are not shared. You’ll need to hire boats and hire people to go and draw the map.

satrunalia44,

That’s true, even if the specific example doesn’t hold, the core concept does. If I needed to implement a bird detector today, I’d make an API call to AWS Rekognition or an equivalent service. It would take me a day or two to learn the API and then maybe 4 hours to actually implement. But if you asked me to implement a bird species detector, I’m pretty sure there is no off the shelf API capable of that, and I would indeed need months or years.

shagie,

Off the shelf… no… though I’ve been rather impressed at the accuracy of the iPhone. There’s this little i in a circle that has a star in the corner which will do a “let me try to match this”. I believe its only a matter of time before this becomes more accessible.

Attempting to match a purple flower on the side of a bike trail

hinterlufer,

Google Lens is also a thing for general usage, and there are plenty options for more specific tasks such as Merlin for birds.

usernamesaredifficul,

yeah and it has been 5 years since the comic and there was a research team that did it

Andrezito,

They probably got 2 research teams

uralsolo,

We can get a computer to tag the birds, answer questions about them, and generate new pictures of them.

Sometimes

comrade_pibb,
@comrade_pibb@hexbear.net avatar

AI always screws up the birds fingers

predmijat,

One of the coolest things I’ve seen this month: www.lerf.io

Nationalgoatism,

I haven’t used a computer to id birds before, so I’ll take your word for it. That being said I know that programs I’ve tried are entirely incapable of identifying mushrooms (or even getting in the correct family sometimes). This may just be an issue of lack data, bc a lot of what I do to id is fairly simple and formulaic. On the other hand I use a lot of context clues which may not be readily apparent ig

frezik,

What could possibly go wrong with mushroom misidentification?

asyncrosaurus,

Wild swings between the greatest trip you’ve ever had, and excruciatingly slow death.

Nationalgoatism,

Nothing I can think of.

GamesRevolution,
@GamesRevolution@programming.dev avatar

It’s actually even more correct because it underestimated the time needed by 5 years

DannyMac,
@DannyMac@lemmy.world avatar

Did you miss the part that said “I’ll need a research team and 5 years?” The XKCD character did it! SUCCESS!

uskok,

Why do you think it’s obsolete? I suppose nowadays we can use AI generative models to explain the difference between the easy and the virtually impossible, but it still can be hard.

transigence,
@transigence@kbin.social avatar

Computer vision was just popping off five years after that, so I would say that it is prescient.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • [email protected]
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • Socialism
  • KbinCafe
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • oklahoma
  • feritale
  • SuperSentai
  • KamenRider
  • All magazines