Opinion: The big AI party is not cancelled, just postponed

Jay Goldberg

Posts: 75   +1
Staff

The first big tech event of the year has come and gone. We went into CES expecting to be completely inundated with "AI", all marketing guns blazing. What we got was much more nuanced.

True, there was an endless number of "AI powered" devices that have nothing to do with AI...

Al backpacks, AI office chairs, and AI toothbrushes to name just three of many. Those are just gadgets (barely) that have a tiny bit of software in them. A decade ago we started calling them "smart," but apparently the memo went around and we are now supposed to call them AI. But that's just part of the normal silliness of CES marketing and every marketer's impossible dream of standing out out from the cacophony.

Editor's Note:
Guest author Jonathan Goldberg is the founder of D2D Advisory, a multi-functional consulting firm. Jonathan has developed growth strategies and alliances for companies in the mobile, networking, gaming, and software industries.

Much more important was the lack of AI commentary from the big vendors. We fully expected lines of PCs and smartphones enabled with transformer-based AI accelerators, but we got none of that. The big, usual suspects had oddly little to say on the subject.

We think there are two causes of this. First, Intel, AMD and Qualcomm have held recent AI-heavy events of their own. The way that tech marketing works now, there is far less return in launching a product at CES, better to host your own event than try to compete with everyone else.

Second, and more telling, no one is ready for any of that AI enablement. ChatGPT is barely a year old, so there is very little silicon tuned for that type of model available yet. Qualcomm is probably the furthest along, but Intel and AMD are still a cycle or so away from having chips on the market that can make any meaningful dent with large language models for consumer devices.

Not all things are made better by speaking to them, sometimes having a screen to look at and a keyboard to type is better.

Moreover, even if they all had their chips ready, what would anyone do with it? The software side of consumer AI is just not there yet. We can argue whether it ever will be there.

Cloud and enterprise AI inference is a different story, but the consumer side needs Microsoft, Google and most especially Apple to show us something interesting.

There were a few interesting ideas out there. For instance, Rabbit launched the Rabbit R1 a voice assistant. However, much like the Humane pin from a few months back, we felt this was much more of a concept than a product we would want to own.

These devices are really just natural language processors, it is novel to be able to have a conversation with an electronic gadget, but true utility is not clear. Our sense is that these devices have not really thought through how a big a change these devices require for human interaction.

Not all things are made better by speaking to them, sometimes having a screen to look at and a keyboard to type is better. There may be a world someday in which we speak to our computers like we are in Star Trek, but for right now a web page or app is still better for most uses.

Permalink to story.

 
And still the AIs can't figure how many finger an human hand naturally has... 3 o more frequently 6 are the AI's preferred options.

chat based AI, also, can't figure out simple questions and continue to give us answers with most frequently searched search engine results. I'm also thinking that al those things must undergo some other times of developing and polishing, before they can really has true marketing way of selling at least a little bit less useless tech things to people.
 
IMO, we have too much fad marketing as it is. If anything, perhaps this indicates that fad marketing is becoming a thing of the past.

Fad marketing has been far from successful in recent years. Just look at all the "content provider" company marketing wonks that tried to jump on the fad of streaming, and have failed miserably because people were streaming for different reasons than jumping on a fad.

Maybe some time in the future, AI will truly be useful to the general consumer. Even if there were "AI silicon" available right now for consumer devices, my bet is that AI would still be as useless as it currently is - outside of trying out the fad, that is. The applications where AI is useful are very limited and tend to be, IMO, in applications where there is significant oversight as to the quality of the results - such as Medical and Materials Science. However, I highly doubt that the "mainstream" AI providers want to invest in oversight of their AI programs because, wait for it, it COSTS TOO MUCH!
 
And still the AIs can't figure how many finger an human hand naturally has... 3 o more frequently 6 are the AI's preferred options.

chat based AI, also, can't figure out simple questions and continue to give us answers with most frequently searched search engine results. I'm also thinking that al those things must undergo some other times of developing and polishing, before they can really has true marketing way of selling at least a little bit less useless tech things to people.
These were solved problems almost a year ago.
 
That's exactly why it's not AI yet. It's still a word calculator, and the "words" part is part of the problem.
 
That's exactly why it's not AI yet. It's still a word calculator, and the "words" part is part of the problem.
Indeed. Machine learning and deep learning are better phrases to describe generative AI, but yet the name has stuck so everybody uses it. Back when it was mostly images it was more easily dismissed as something niche and cool (or a threat if you're an artist), but language is the tool all humans use to interact with nearly everything (not just observe, but respond). Generative AI isn't general AI, despite the similarity of the terms. There's definitely a lot of potential, as a tool, but it is quite challenging to harness that potential in reliable ways. Doing something cool once or twice is neat, doing something productive, repeatedly, with little chance of error, is quite another story.
 
I realised just the other day that my neighbour actually does get a real benefit from the dedicated "Alexa" speaker appliance. His eyesight is almost nonexistent and he has never bothered with screen readers or any other aid so he was becoming illiterate in a way.

So, for me it's just a gimmick but for him he can start to use a search engine for the first time in his life.
 
Last edited:
And still the AIs can't figure how many finger an human hand naturally has... 3 o more frequently 6 are the AI's preferred options.

chat based AI, also, can't figure out simple questions and continue to give us answers with most frequently searched search engine results. I'm also thinking that al those things must undergo some other times of developing and polishing, before they can really has true marketing way of selling at least a little bit less useless tech things to people.
What about human genders, how many can the AI's count so far, 3 or 5?
 
As far as I've seen, the so-called AI software apps are being used mostly to more easily create better fake stuff on the Web - fake news, fake videos and photos and to cheat on your licence/master's diploma (use the AI tools to write it for you)
 
Last edited:
Thank for putting this in perspective! I was discussing w/ a colleague that AI, as we know it now, has been around for over a decade, and now it's just a trendy word. I like your "smart" prefix example, that's exactly what we used to say but now its AI AI AI.

I'm just waiting to see what happens to Nvidia's stock price, it's in the stratosphere the way Tesla went in 2020...all on the hype of AI.
 
Back